Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-02-04

were ever abandoned, the rst time they re-
eced by Congress- by the defeat Of tho provision in
the House Of Representatives in l84S. whom was
that defeat effected? By Northern votes With Freesoi
procvties 1t the defeat Of that Miseuri compro
mise that reopened the slavery agitation wit all its fury
1t was the defeat of that Missouri compromise that
of that Missouri compromise that created he necessity
| for making a compromise in 1850, lad we been
faithful to the principles Of the Missouri cnpromise in
1913 this question would not have arisen. Who was 1t
that faithless? undertake say twas the very
men who insist that the Missouri compromise
solemn compact and should be yolate departed
from. Every who is assaing the principle of
the bill under consideration, far am advised, was
opposed to the Missouri compromise in 1S4s The very
men who arraign me for departure firm the Mis-
souri, compromise the men who successfully violated
it, repudated it, and caused it to be superseded by the
compromise of 1850 Sir, it is with rather bad
grace that the who proved false themselves should
charge upon and others, who aithfu, the
responsibilities and consequences Of their reachery
Them sir, as before remarked the defeatof the Mis-
compromise in S4S having created the necessity for
the establishment of new in 1885, let what
that compromise was
The leading feature Of the compromise If 1850 was
Congressional non Intervention slavery the Terri
tories the people Of the Territories AMI of all the
States he allowed to do they pleased upon the
subject of slavery, subject only to the provons OF the
Constitution Of the United States.
That, sir, the leading feature Of the compromise
measure of 1850 Those measures Therefore abandoned
the idea of geographical line the boundary between
free States and slave States; abandoned it because COM
PEELED to do it from inability to maintain it; and in
lieu of that substituted great principle of elfgovern
ment which would allow the people to do ey thought
proper Now the question is when that newcopromise
resting upon that great fundamental principe of free
DOM established, was it not abandonment of the
old one the geographical line? Was it not spersedure
of the old within the very language OF tie substi
tute for the bill which is under consideration say
it did supersede it, because il applied its provisions
well to the north to the south of S60 3T esta-
bshed principle which equally applicable to the
country north well south of the parallel 800 800
principle Of universal application. The authors Of this
abolition manifesto attempt to refue this presumption,
and maintain that the compromise 1850 did not super
sede that of 1920 by quoting the ppyso to the first
ton of the establish the Texan boundary and esta
bsh the Territory of New Mexicl That provso was
added by way Of amendment, milton by Mr.. MASON
of Virginia.
before stated, that the Missouri compromise aban
doned and superseded by the principles Of the compro
mise of 1885, these confederate, cite the following
amendment offered to the bill to esablish the boundary
Of Texas and create the Territory Of New Mexico
in 1850:
"Prorided That nothing herein contained shall be
trued to impair qualify thing contained in the third
article Of the second section OF the join resolution for
ing Texas to the United States appDved March l. 1885,
either regards the number of Satehat hereafter be
formed ont of the State of Texas or Otherwise.
After quoting this proviso they make the following
statement and attempt to gain crdt for its truth by
suppressing material facts which APPEAR upon the face Of
the statute and if produced would conclusively
disproye the statement:
1t is solemny declared in the verycompromise that
nothing herein contained shall be consed impair qua
y the prohibition of slavery north Of $50 SO and yet in
the face Of this declaration that is said to
be overthrown. Can presumption further go?"
will now proceed to show that presumption could not
20 further than is exhibited in this declaration.
They suppress the following mateial facts which, if
produced would have disproved their statement They
first suppress the fact that the section Of the act
off Toyo IN ted al
that part of Texas which lies NORTH Of $50 3O They
then suppress the further fact that the section Of
the law cuts off from Texas large tract of country
the west than three degrees oongtude and added
the territory of the United States They then sup
press the further fact that this territory thus off from
Texas and to which the Missouri compromise line did ap
ply incorporated into the Territory of New Mexico
And then what done 1t incorporated into that
Territory with this clause:
Tha when admitted State the said Territory, any
portion of the same shall be received into the Union with
without slavery their Constitution prescribe ut the
time of its adoption"
Yes sir, the very bill and section from which they
quote off all that part of Texas which be free
the Sa Of the a e
Of New Mexico and then says that that Territory, and
every portion of the same shall come into the Union with
without slavery, ms it sees proper.
What else does it do? The sixth section of the same
provides that the legislative power and authority Of
this said Territory of New Mexico shall extend to all
rghtful subjects of legislation consistent with the Con-
Sttuton OF the anu provisions OF
excepting slavery. Thus the New Mexican bill,
from which they make that quotation contained the pro-
vision that New Mexico including that part Of Texas
which was cut off, should into the Union with
without slavery, it proper: and in the time
that the Territorial Legislature should have all the
hory the subject Of slavery that they had any
other subject restricted only by the limitations of the
Constitution of the United States and the provisions of
the act Now ask those Senator's do not those provi
sons repeal the Missouri compromise far it applied
that country cut off from Texas? Do they not annul
it? Do they supersede it? If they do then the ad
dress which been put forth to the world by these
federatesis an arocous asehood If they do not then
what do they when they charge me with having in
the substitute first reported from the committee repealed
it, with having annued it, with having violated it, when
only copied those precise words? copied the precise
contained in the New Mexico bill. They say my
bill annus the Missouri compromise. Ii it does, it had
already been done before by the act of 1850 for these
words copied from the act Of 1850.
Mr.. WADE. Why did you do it over again?
MIR. DOUGLAS / will come to that point presently,
and explain why we did it again. am dealing
with the truth and veracy of combination of who
arragn my conduct and belle my character say there
fore, that their manifesto is SANDER either way for it
says that the Missouri compromise not superseded
by the of $780, and when it says that the
words in my bill do repeal and annul it, they must be
adudged guilty of falsehood in order to sustain the
other assertion.
Now, sir propose to 90 little further, and show
what the real meaning of the amendment OF the Sena
tor from Virginia, Of which these gentlemen have
manufactured so much capital in the newspaper press,
and have succeeded by that Misrepresentation procur
ing expression Of opinion from the State of Rhode Is
land in opposition this bill will state what its mean
ing is. Did it mean that the States north of 3G0 3
SO