The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-05-19


9th of March, 1920 called the Missouri Compromise that
if the said act irreyoeable compact II was dis
ayowed and repudated by the North within eleven months
from its date that Missouri having formed constitution
cononabe in all respects TO said act denied adms-
sion into the Union in February 1891 by northern votes
that the North, by vote of six-one TO thrtythree
motion of Mr. Mallory OF Vermont refused 10 admit Mis-
souri, into the Union, with constitution corresponding
with precise of the alleged compact unless sin
addition" thereto she would Jaaher proeide IN and by
sad constitution, thai neither SLAVERY involuntary serp
hde shall BE- ao,eed said State Of Missouri - that in
consequence OF the refusal OF the representatives from the
northern States To carry into effect what is known the
Compromise of 1920, Missouri compelled to submit
one in the form Of irreyocabe compact be-
that State and the United States by the terms Of
which she be admitted into the Union on new
Condition unlike anything contained in the act Of 1920
that this compact entered into and approved the
I'd of March, 1921 that Missouri complied with the oond
ton in the month Of June thereafter and that the 10th
of August 1921 the President of the United States issued
his proclamation declaring the fulhlment of the "cond
ton the part of Missouri and the admission Of such
State into the Union Sin pursuance Of the joint resolution
airrevocabe compact of March O. 1921 and not in
orny ,ch the act Of 1920 If there any reliance upon
human testimony ii there is faith TO be attached to htor
zeal and official records these facts Being true
there is provision in the "natonal engagement
tanned in the joint resolution of 1921 under which Mis-
souri, admitted into the Union whereby slavery
prohibited north of 36 deg 80 min elsewhere in the
territories Of the United States does the Nebraska bill
propose to repeal impair, or in any manner affect that
"irrevocable compact Is 1t not manifest therefore, ac-
cordng all the evidences accessible to the human
Outstanding that you have labored under lamentabe de-
lusion in supposing that the Nebraska bill involved
breach Of faith emnenty injurious the of the
community and subversive of all confidence in national
When you shall have Withdrawn the unfounded allega-
ton that the bill involves "a breach Of faith" and shall
made public confession of the injustice you have done
the Senate in this particular perhaps you win conceive it
to be your duty to perseyere in opposition to its
sage upon the ground that renders imperative and void
the eighth section Of the act of 820n which Congress
assumed the right prohibit slavery in that country not
only while it should remain Territory, but in all time to
actnc hau. haan lixla ttnI
into the Union sovereign and independent States Re
mnding you again that it necessary render that
section imperative and void in order to recognise the great
principle OF segovernment and State equality, and
leave the people free to regulate their local and
domestic institutions in their way you will discover
that your opposition is confined exclusively to the prnc
Piles Of popular sovereignty II does not vary the question
in any degree, that human slavery is in your opinion
great moral wrong If So it is not the only wrong upon
which the people of each of the States and Territories of
this Union called upon to act and decide for them
selves In the opinion Of large and respectable portion
of people, the manufacture and sale of ardent spirits
and intoxicating drinks is monsrous wrong eminenty
Injurious to the morals of the community While these
opinions honestly entertained and vigorous efforts
being made induce the legislatures Of the different States
and Territories to pass laws for their enforcement have
witnessed attempt to induce Congress to declare the
Maine law to be in force in all the Territories of the Uni
ted States and to remain in force forever in the States to
be formed thererom regardless of the rights and wishes of
the people to be affected thereby.
very large and exemplary portion Of our Christian
community firmly believe that the practice of carrying the
nails of running stagecoaches for the conveyance pas
sengers, and Of keeping open pubc-hOuses and bar
for gain Sunday is great moral wrong yet
Congress should propose to declare by fundamental
and rrevocable that in all time come such prac-
tees should be tolerated in any of the Territory
which possess may hereafter acquire in any
State to be formed from such Territory it is possible
that another portion of the Christian community equally
exemplary and sincere might rise and say that it is
firm conviction after thorough examination of the Holy
Scriptures that the seventh day. instead of the first day of
the week. Sabbath which God has commanded us to
keep holy and that If this law passes you exclude and
brethren and descendants forever from settling in those
Territories and States compel conform article
of religious faith repugnant to conscientious belief
Although you may be Of the opinion and doubtless are
that the practice Of performing secular duties and attend
ing to worldly affairs Sunday is not in accordance with
the Divine law recorded in the Holy Scriptures it does
appear that You desire the interference Of Congress
this particular TO deprive the people of the Territories and
States of the privilege Of regulating these matters
conformity with their of propriety and duty trust
that the great body of the American people look upon the
manufacture sale and of instruments and implements
Of gaming wrong eminenty injurious TO the public
morals yet have heard objection to leaving the people
Of each State and Territory free determine that question
according to their sense Of right and propriety.
will trouble you further with this class of cases
having cited enough to illustrate the principle The
tire criminal code Of each State and Territory Of the Union
and every section and provision thereof supposed to
late to great moral wrong which the people in their
sovereign capacity have deemed it their duty to prohibit
and possible prevent by penalties and punshments In
asmuch you willing to leave these questions and all
Others which supposed to be injurious TO the morals Of
the community and preudical The best interests of So
cety in the hands OF the people OF the respective States
and Territories would it not be better and wiser in
trust the slavery question TO the arbrament of the
authority rather than TO violate the great principle of self
government which lies at the foundation of all free in
sttuons3 If correctly understand your position you
do not object TO permitting the people Of the Territories in
the in the States exercise all righul
power and authority in all matters affecting the rights in
erests and happiness Of white IL the people
pable of sefgovernment do not understand that IL
quires any higher degree of intelligence virtue civzs
on TO legisate for the negro than for the white II
will not be pretended that the legislature Of any Territory
State would could, under the constitution deprive
any free man, black white of his liberty except for
crime will IL be Insisted that Congress has the power
10 confer any such authority Hence there is possibility
Of free being reduced TO slavery of the number
Of slaves in the United States being increased by the
passage Of the Nebraska bill The only effect il could
possibly have in respect to the slave is that in certain
contingency he might be permitted TO enter the country
and remain there SUCH and In certain other contin
gency he could f slave should be removed from
Kentucky Nebraska, the effect would be to reduce the
number the side of the Mississippi the
tent that IL increased the west without cnlargng
the political power of the master producing any nju
rious consequences the slave while by the mere fact
Of his removal from an old country to one from
lands TO rich ones from scarcity 10 abundance
Of provisions his temporal condition would be improv ed
and his physical comforts increased His presence In the
new Territory could not in any mode degree affect In
human being In any other Territory or State hs
be offensive injurious ybody would
be TO the people of the Territory where he was oca
ted Them why not leave il to the people Of such Territory
State to decide for themselves whether he shall be permit
ted to come not Nobody else has any interest in
no other State or Territory would be affected by IT, II is
purely question OF domestic concern which for veal or
for woe Affects the people of such Territory or State and
nobody else You think that you are abundanty compe-
to decide this question now and Yorever IL you