The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-07-13
CON CIR RESSION All.
SPEECH OF HON. JAS. G. ALLEN,


The House being Committee of the Whole ON the
of the Union
Mr. JAMES @. ALLEN said;
Mr. CnAIRMaK have obtained the floor at this time for
the purpose of addressing the committee the bill
pending for the organization of territorial governments for
Nebraska and Kansas. H.o.s
1t is not my purpose speak of the necessity of these
territorial organizations but conne myself TO the consd
Grafton OF that feature in the bin which to have
cited the fears of some and the Indignation Of Others in
this as in the other end of this Capitol.
allude to that provision which declares that the Mis-
souri, Compromise being inconsistent with the principle OF
non-ntervenon by Congress with slavery in the States
and Territories recognised by the legislation OF $780,
imperative and void 2 and which further declares the in
tent and meaning of the act to be not to legslae slavery
into any State Territory TO exclude it hererom but
TO leave the people thereof perfectly free to form and regulate
their domestic institutions in their way subject only
to the constitution of the United States"
Sir of the representatives from free State de-
sire that this House and the country should understand the
grounds upon which give my support to this BILL and
particularly to that clause in the bill to which have re-
ierred
What is this Missouri Compromise? What was the OBJ
ject for which it adopted? And wherein is it ncon-
sisent with the principle of the Compromise of 1850
These all important inquiries the solution Of which win
better enable TO determine what duty in relation
to the bill now pending with this committee.
The Missouri Compromise provides, that north of SO
deg 30 min in that territory ceded by France to the United
States in lS03 slavery and involuntary seryitude should
be torerr prohibited except for the commission Of crime
whereof the parties have been duly convicted. 1t was
adopted for the purpose OF alaying the excitement that
out Of the agitation consequent upon the application
of Missouri for admission into the Union with constitu-
tion recognising slavery But it not has been
tended by some of the conditions upon which Missouri
admitted 1t formed part of the compact between
Missouri and the other States Mt her admissions for al
though she (ssonr) applicant for admission at
the date of this Compromise owing to other provisions in
her constitution she by that Congress rejected So
that all the argument sought to be drawn from this
sourccthat is that the admission Of Missouri aud the
tabshment of the so-caed Missouri-C Compromise act,
fOrm of he lepiau
one was made to depend on the othcrmust fall to the
ground.
repeat that the seeming necessity for this Compromise
act out of the excitement upon the slavery question:
which assumed threatening aspect upon her application
for admission some measure necessary to quiet the
fears of the people, and suppress the danger that then
threatened the Union of the Stesome principle of
promise that would hen and by its application afterwards
under similar circumstances serve to keep down agitation
upon this slavery question. f..
And this line of 36 deg 30 min adopted north OF
which slavery was not TO 60 and to which (by impica-
tom slavery mightgo II was argued that this would
quiet the country that it would satisfy both the North
and the South and that it would cut off agitation upon
this subject in the future.
Although served for time to allay excitement yet the
country has since had abundant evidence that it did
and that owing to the principle upon which it based
it could accomplish the objects intended by its
thors one of which was to prohibit slavery north OF this
line not only long that country retained its terrific
rial character, but to continue this inhibition after this
Territory had thrown off its territorial character and taken
its rank independent State
Now sir the doctrine that Congress had any such power
this is abandoned bcdng altogether inconsistent
with State sovereignty; and but few, II nny statesmen
be found who will contend that this prohibition gould
extend further than while this Territory retained its terri
torial character.
1t has been sad sir that Mr. Clay the author OF this
compromise and the sentiments of esteem and l might
say feeling of reverence which felt for him. have been
appealed by the enemies of this biIl have been
conjured not to repeal this compromise lest commit
sort of political sacrege by disturbing what they say
the work of his hands But unfortunately for those who
have sought to bring his name and memory to bear against
this bill it turns out that he not the author of that
compromise neither he favorable to the principle up
which based He had watched its effect for thirty
years he had its failure accomplish the objects
tended by it, is shown by his remarks upon that sub
ect referred to by the gentleman from Kentucky, IMr
EWING, on yesterday but he did not stop with the
marks referred to that OCCASION but another during
the conflict of 1850, his voice raised to that
at high time that the wounds which the Wimot pro-
vso had inflicted should be healed up and closed and
that to avoid in all future Nme the agitation which must
be produced by the conflict opinion on the slavery ques
ton the true lncpl aghch ou9M to regulate the action
Congress in forming territorial governments for each
y-acqured domain is to refrain from all legislation the
subject in He territory dcgured long retains The
riioral form Of gorernmentp
quote from his report, chairman of the Committee OF
Thirteen the compromise resolutions introduced by that
committee into the Senate 1850. Here sir have his
declaration twenty years after the adoption of this Nis
souri, Compromise when full time had elapsed to test its
adaptation to the purposes for which desgnedhs
solemn declaration against the principle of interference by
Congress upon the question Of slavery in the Territories
the United States; and yet his is invoked to prevent
the application OF the very principle he lays down the
which should obtain the Territories Of the United
States What is the inference that rresisby forces tse
upon the mind, upon examining what he says in this
port upon this subject? Is it sir that experience had
satisfied him that the principle of the Missouri Compromise
wrong, and that the principle of the Compromise OF
1850 right?
Although the adoption of this Missouri Compromise
served for time to alay excitement yet it only for
time Owing to the principle embraced in it, it has served
incentive to aboltonis:s and free-soers of the North
to keep up agitation by endeavoring induce Congress
to legislate further upon The subject
This doctrine OF the right and proprety of Congress to
egsate upon the subject is the principle upon which this
Compromise founded This doctrine laid hold o
by Wmot and his followers when they urged Congress
prohibit the introduction Of slavery into territory acquired
from Mexico Congress they told us had interviewed had
exercised the power of excluding slavery from the territory
which now propose to organize and the precedent
set. nothing would satisfy them but its application
every foot Of territory acquired either by purchase
quest
The line of SO deg 30 min adopted in 1920 north of
which slavery not to go sufficient satisfy
them but the power must be exercised upon all Ter
ritories south well north Aud it this determi-
nation upon their part to force congressional action upon
this subject that led the fearful of the public mind
which WAS only allayed by the Compromise of 1850
And what would little strange, sir those who
have read the history of that party closely is the
that theyyes sir the very who oudest and
crcest in their denuncatop of this bill who seized
with such holy horror at the idea of the repeal tho
Missouri Compromise who with ghosy faces veil hy-
pocrsy and conjure the country stand by the Com
promise of 192Oare of that school of politicians who
nounced the Compromise of 1920, and who have ever
sought when occasion offered to violate its inenton-l
mean political abotonsts They denounced il when il
made in 1920 They opposed it when it rendered
by the South to that portion of Texas lying north of 36
deg 30 mn in S45 They rebclled against its extension
to the Pacific in ls4s They opposed its application to the
territories acquired from Mexico in 1850 Short when
IA A..