Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-03-19

law by which the people of the new States
shall be deprived of the right of self-govcrn-
ment in this particular, or forever controlled
in the exercise oft.
Such, sir, was not the practice of the gov
eminent for the first thirty years of its exist
ence, nor until one generation, that which
adopted the Constitution, had passed away from
the stage of action. In every instance of the
organization of Territories, and the admission
of New States, this principle of non-interven-
r ton was adopted and their condition in regard
to the domestic institutions Of slavery was left
unchanged. When Vermont was admitted into
the Union, in 1871, having been formed from
part of the territory of New York, she was I'D
mitted as she was, q non-slaveholding State
When Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, in the yeal s
1902, 1916, and 1918, respectively, were ad
mitted, they were admitted as nen-slaveholding
States, retaining the character which had been
impressed upon them before the Constitution
by the ordinance of the Continental Congress.
On the other hand, sir, when, Kentucky, IN
1892, was admitted, having been formed from
part Of the territory of Virginia, she came in
by the consent of Congress with her former
character untouched; that is as aslaveholding
State. When Tennessee was under a territorial
government, and when she was admitted into
the Union in 1896, having been formed from
territory that was ceded by North Carolina, she
retained her former character as aslaveholding
Territory and a slaveholding State.
When Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi,
in 1872, 1917, and 1919, respectively. were ad-
mitted into the Union, they were admitted as
slareholding States, retaining their former char
acter which they had still continued to possess
under the territorial governments established
over them by Congress. Thus in every in
- Nd -, y,,,
stance of organizing q Territory, from the foun-
dalton Of the government TO the date Of the
Missouri restriction, Congress, acting under the
Constitution, pursued this constitutional policy
Of absolute non-interference with its character.
When, therefore, the honorable senator from
Ohio, Mr. CHASE in his speech the other
day, advanced proposition which he declared
to be absolutely indisputable, that it was the
original policy of the country to exclude sia,
very from all national territory" Il repeat his
language from memory if he meant to be
understood that that proposition applied to the
country under the Constitution, which we have
all sworn to support, beg leave to say that
he was entirely mistaken in his proposition. 1t
is.contrary to every fact of history that can be
found in the annals of Congress touching the
organization of q Territory, or the admission OF
State, from the date of the Constitution to the
date of the Missouri restriction. ] know of no
greater error that any one can fall into than
to say that, from the date of the Constitution
to the Missouri restriction, the uniform and
settled policy of the government was not that
of non-intervention, but intervention, with the
domestic institution Of slavery in the States and
Territories, either to introduce to suppress it
Mr.. CHASE. VIII the honorable senator
allow me single word?
Mr. T0ITCEY Certainly
Mr.. CHASE. The statement which made,
and which / think the facts of our history will
bear out was, that the original policy of the
government was the exclusion of slavery from
all the territory of the United States. went
on to show what / conceived to be departure
from that policy in the acceptance ofthe cession
from North Carolina, in 1890, with a stipula
ton that the prohibition Of the ordinance Of
1857 should not apply to it, and in various
other particulars. ] do not wish to 60 into the
matter again; but this is an appropriate occa-
sion to call the attention of the honorable seqa-
tor from Connecticut to an error OF fact into
which he has fallen himself, and which, have
no doubt, he will be very glad to correct; and
it is important, as bearing upon my own argu
ment. He states that, at the time of the for
nation of the Constitution, there was north
western territory and q southwestern territory
the northwestern territory covered by the pro-
hibition of the ordinance Of l7S7, and the south
western territory acquired from South Caro-,
lima. The facts in regard to the latter propo
sition are these: In April, 1857, Georgia and
South Carolina entered into a contract, by
which it was stipulated that Tombgbee river
should be the western boundary of South Caro-
lima, provided that river extended north to the
northern limit Of the State; if it did not, Their
South Carolina was to have a boundary run
ming westward from the source of that river L
the Mississippi. In fact it did extend north t
the north line of the State, and consequently
there was no line running westward.
But the State Of South Carolina in this agree
ment, expressly renowned all claim to any
territory westward of that line. She therefore
had no territory west of the line of the presen
limits Of the State and when, in August, 1871
few months later, she ceded to the United
States her claim to territory west OF that line
she coded precisely what she had, nothing
and the United States acquired precisely what
she had, nothing; andt hesouthwestern territory
exists only in the imagination of the honorable
senator from Connecticut. There was no such
territory and, of course, my proposition was
strictly and historically correct, that the prohi
bition of the ordinance Of 1887 did cover al
the territory of the United States at the time o.
the adoption of the Constitution.
Mr.. TOUCEY. i will ask the honorable
senator from Ohio if that territory did not then
belong to the United States before the adoption
of the Constitution?
Mr. CHASE. What territory?
Mr.. TOUCEY. The southwestern.
Mr.. CHASE. There was none at that time.
Mr.. CASS. What was called the southwest
ern territory was coded by North Carolina,
after the adoption of the Constitution, and
formed out of the State of Tennessee.
Mr.. CHASE. As the senator from Michigan
says, it was ceded in l790rby North Carolina.
A cession was also made by Georgia in 1902.
Mr.. CASS. referred to what was called
the territory southwest of the river Ohio.
Mr.. TOUCEY. do not refer to that, but
allude to that tract of country from which were
formed the States of Alabama and Mississippi;
and alluded to the first date Of the title. South
Carolina claimed that territory, and conveyed
it to the United States.
Mr.. CHASE. There is the document.
M TOIJCEY / know IT, | have referred