The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-09


ereizny Of the States over their territory"
To fonifs my own position, might multiply sushon-
lies like these almost Indefinitely may be sufficient 10
say that 50 far as know strict construetons the
South has yielded the point thai the Inhabitants Of
Territory could exclude slavery. All have stood upon
the common ground that the people. when they 10
form State constitution, beng duly entitled BY their
bes and position IN the government 10 make such
an Instrument, ay il they think proper exclude slavery.
and then iis exclusion forms no just ground of COM
plant
Justice. Mr. President requires iha, should, al this
point Tecur 10 speech delivered by myself in the House
OF Representatives, the 81 Of June, lsls. II will be
found at page. GAS of the Appendix to the Globe hen
said
:. The people hold the Territories as tenants in common
sna an of ana aay ha q hem m a s ensa ,a these Isrors
he bsr none,y Tey sn saae n H. for IeI se
sopa projection and the preservation Of their properly
ssvsps sf and q eqaAi shi' WIN
.sThe first who enter Territory cannot assume sover-
eigny which belongs TO all The specific exercise of
areen over the question Of slavery s held In abeyance
until the people oi the Territory ash admission into the
Union STATE according constitution and being
admitted, the State becomes sovereign within her limits
win not delain the Senate with reproduction OF
gunens employed by al that lime. My consistency
Is vindcaied in what have read. summed up fol-
lows
| the conclusions, Mr. Chairman, which my
mind has arrived oa the several points nyoved briefly
aese; That every czen oil Unised States may 20
The Territories and take vita him his property, be slaves
q ss e
power authority exclude him and the power OF
se5as py exec.sea - s ,esai0es,
be s1erted for the equal benefit OF alfor the south
en STAKEHOLDER no less an for The northern dealer in dry
goods"
1t will be seen. Mr. President that treated The sub
lect then do | asserted then, assert to-
day, that whoever legisates for the Territories whether
It be Congress territorial Legislature, is much
bound 10 give protection my property the prop
erty OF any else II The constitutions is to be OBJ
served, and our tights under il are equal want to know
ix hat. fhar raia faf ~anHS AhDll ttsa
senator from Ohio, Mr. WADE,l who lives in country
where the people invest OF their gain in livestock
take his peculiar kind oil property into the Territory OF
Nebraska and then turn upon and say you shall not
take your property there Shall he do this simply because
chance have invested the products OF my labor IN
something 10 which be has a prejudice He and his
constituents preudlced against slavery and will
1--we IN country where i, exists Suppose and my
snents were 10 take The prejudice against hogs,
and sheep and cattle and say thai we would not live in
country where they were permitted Suppose that We,
being majority, should say 10 the people OF Ohio, You
shall not drive your stock into the Territories :"
would we have right TO do III Would not the gentle
man consider such declaration invasion OF his
sutuiional privieaess Whether deprived OF his pnv-
lege emig rate with his livestock by the territorial
egislzine, by the federal authority, woud be
gard an iniraeton OF his rights American ctzen
Let me put another case The senator from Connec-
cut MIR. SMITH comes from couniry where they make
CLOCKS and sometimes very good ones: bat we happen,
al the South 10 have some prejudices against Yankee
clocks Suppose people the first 10 60 into this
Terriao could they 10 The people OF Connecticut
the hst bali dozen or fifty OF us who might enigraie
from Mississippi or Alabama undertake 10 exclude ali
New England, simply oa the clock question: This Ter
rIt0ry area about tunes large the
State OF Virginia Now, the question is, have the first
hai dozen southerneTs who happened TO squat one
corner of i right 10 say that in all future time, 10 no
Part OF this domain, shall there be brought
a Connecticut cleck Would il nc; be monstrous
Would the people OF Connecticut be willing submit to
it, Certainly Dot; and why becsase clock Is proper
ty II i something IN which iney invest The products Of
their aborsomething against which they have no pre-
JUDGE, bat against which we have.
Now, sir, submit that If | and my constituents have
right TO gray pr.udiees the expense OF Con-
neccu and her clocks, then the and his cons
uenis have no night 10 CRAFTY theirs at the expense of
MIsslssippi and ber negroes.
will not pursue this branch oil the subject further II
not my intention in the beginning make speech,
and have TO apologize 10 the Senate for having already
consumed more time than ought
| intend. Mr.. President, to vote for this bill But
must confess that The particular section under debate, and
the oHe which has given rise TO much discussion, s
ambiguity and, as like drectness 10 legislation,
would II II had been left 10 have couched II 10 Ian
guage explicit that could have mistaken IL. II
declares, consequence OF former legislation that the
Missouri Compromise Is imperative and void. would
have said IN terms "the Missouri Compromise is hereby
repealed But as the esd Is attained, will not chatter
10 the means BY which attain that end.
The language e.ployed BY the distinguished author OF
this BILL and mover OF the section under cOnsidera
uon, 10 ibai the people Of the Territory may regulate
their domestic institutions for themselves subject
only 10 the restrictions of the constitution. should
have preferred simple repeal OF the Missouri res,ric
ton. Thai would have restored to the position we
had before The Law passed, and would have been
Tree from ambiguity creumlocuion Buithetanguage
employed Is not decidedly Objectionable TO me, and re-
peat, | will vote for the bill
By yielding the "tighi 10 regulate domestic insiIt8
uons" understand yield the right simply regulate,
not TO destroy To regulate Is thing to destroy Is
anolher and vsrS different thing
Domestic institutions include, as admit, the relation
Of husband and wife, parent and child, master and
want But deny that the right regulate along
with u The right 70 destroy. he night regulate the
relation between and servant no entitled the
regulating power destroy that relation than does The
power TO regulate the relation between the husband and
wife suhouze the destruction OF iba, relation As well
might The territorial legislature take wife from her hus-
band, under pre,ence of regulating their relations
take a from hs under pre,ence OF regnia.
ting bs, res'ion. This s my opinion, and vote for
the bl clothed in its present pbraseooxy because this
my opinion II thought that IN voting for the bill az
now stands, eoneedng the right Of the people in
the Territory during the territorial existence 10 exclude
slavery, would withhold my vote Tina, eqsaiify that
exists among the States, and the people OF the States,
srucion OF The language employed 10 the bill senators,
North and Souh have spoken the bill conceded the
right Of the people IN Territory 10 exclude slavery.
h combat the ides Il leaves the question where | am
quite willing iI~shoud be le-o TIE ultimate decss,on
OF the courts. Ii is purely judicial question, and
Congress will refrain from ntimatng opinion, am
wiling that the Supreme Court shall decide H. But
have too often that Court sustaining the inlen-
tons Of Congress 10 risk decision my favor after
Congress has decided against The alien and sedi-
ton laws the bank Law, The tariff law have all been
decided constitutional And why Not. in my opinion,
because they bui because the Supreme Court,
coordinate department Of the government, dis