The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-06-07

hs asued M eSa yssE wall 10 ressissdea
tssns tfsssr ~eNsd ~ A SNA~ sp4BN e0H9 ae
snedssA - sssss4s aaA. ~
ssAfile - MvsDAALE ~alssSsrs. 80 sncp~ds
ssAA ~ sehsss, viii BE- ssdnsdso
sesv svaes % hmdns q noiiihnoo 5af 5gnt daidT
-- = - - .1 = = - ...l.z-ss
any circumstances but especially wh ,As member iron,
Ohio laims thsn ~ syGps,hxsrw,h him, whsrehy he
does them great inusee. "a sYonnea nggdtlua sosi
Mr. Chaxmsa this hill aims 40 accomplish nothing more
less than what wss deas by tho Nuv Aeaoo and It
bills There great pxsdple isstAhahed by their
passage What tkAApgiacisae3 Itwas hAt the pso7
States Of the Union to- haze the right 40 come
e1ev with h0ut sacey, Me a1M Pru,s@ a. 9setr
consultations And that believe was understood To- hea
final settlement Of this vexed question Of slavery. 40 ID
How this matter regarded in 1861 by the two polt7
zeal parties OF the country when they made their si-
dental nomnatonsf We have been told repeatedly that
both parties in their platforms, pledged themselves TO
stand by the Compromise OF 1850 and put down and
vent the agitation upon the Subject Of slavery both IN and
out OF the hals OF Congress 30 they did and why did
they do 30 Because both parties believed that this ycxed
question had been settled By the establishment of great
principle that to govern ana control in all future
which might arise 1H
Sir did they intend only 70 apply that principle 70 the
two Territories of New Mexico aud then about 10 bo
organzed2 Did they imagine that they would never be
called upon 70 organize another Territory Did they sup
pose that territory might not sll be extended further
and further, north as well as SOUTH and especially our
democratic friends who claim be peculiarly progression
ists and who in favor annexing rsaaxg all the
territory they righty obtain? Must they not have
clearly seen II they egsating with reference alone to
the Territories mentioned and not to establish prin
cpe Of general application, the difficulties would
occur and the questions would have 20 be settled in
reference to each individual Territory which might after
wards be organized They would have been engaged in
an idle business if they had intended the principle
to be universal When therefore the respective
parties pledged themselves in their platforms to stand
BY. the Compromise Of 1850, and to discountenance
agitation upon the subject Of slavery in and out of the
halls Of Congress, they intended TO carry out tho
principles Of that compromise in all future legisla-
ton insist to-day that stand upon the platform of
my party The friends Of this bill are but seeking carry
out the principles of the Compromise Of 1885, laid down in
the New Mexico and Utah bs and those northern gen
uemen, whether they be whgs democrats or aboition
ists who opposing it, themselves chargcable with
agitation in violaon Of the platforms which they pledged
But it is said the repeal Of the Missouri restriction would
be violation Of contract compact, compromise
have already referred TO some circumstances attending the
passage Of that which will repeat There
compromise In regard TO the bill for the admission
Of Missouri; but 1t cannot be said contract
the houses Of Congress and is matter of
mon occurrence just such dsagrcements have taken
place than once during the present session Of Com
rress disagreement between this House and the Sem
ate which occurred but few weeks in reference to
bill passed by the Senate dsposng Of its contingent fund.-
example in point Of the necessity Of having commit
tees Of conference Suppose when the alien and sedton
laws passed. there had been disagreement between
the two houses which resulted in committees Of
suppose the committees had met each had conceded lit
tie and thereby to agreement and then the
specye houses had ratified what their committees had
the act thus passed irrepealable it
tract it Is TO declare the Missouri Compromise
contract and irepealable7 And would there not be as
much reason for saying Its repeal would be violation Of
cOntract? !? .y4 l~ 4s-saaa&Aa ss3t M4tk
To constitute contract there are certain Indispensable
requisites There must be parties competent to contract
sderdon and the agreement must be awfukthat ia not
in conavcnon Of tbs law Of the land. submit to the
ents Of contract between the North and the South
listed Representatives IN Congress have no power 10
the consttuon when elected they arc delegated to act
for their constituents within the pale Of tbs constitutions
and whenever they transcend It's limits their acts void
Every which they may pass Is also repeaab under
the constitution by any subsequent Congress Whatever
agreements therefore they might enter into give their
binding character than is given by the const
tuton could most be obligatory only the individual
members for the time being and not upon their constitu
ents SUCCESSORS. ..-a .se .
cusiyely shows there was no agreement entered into,
clothed with the socmnites of contract be binding in
s o IN Of
the restriction of slavery north of 36 deg 30 min not
guarantees that slavery should be admitted in future
Territories and States south Of that line The honorable
member from Vermont Mr. MEAcnAx] said the considcra
ton received by the South the admission OF Missouri
saveholdng State into the Union which consideration
paid In advance II his zeal TO crcumscrbe African
slavery and prostrate southern rights had permitted him
70 search for the truth of history would have found that
Missouri did not come into the Union under the alleged
contract Of that when she asked for admission under
a constitution framed in with the provisions of
that she rsed By norfasrn and not adj
med until she complied with conditions prescribed
by oompronss entered into in the Congress of 1921
The restriction was in violation of the constitution.
The tenth article of the amendments to the constitution
declares IS fGpl lrTn 8 kat
The powers delegated to the United States by the
consultation nor prohibited BY to States are reserved
to the States respectively, or to the people
The preceding article declares
The enumeration In the constitution Of certain rights
shall be construed TO deny dparage others retained by
the people" u 4tH #lE rW
In the enumeration in the constitution Of the powers Of
Congress no grant Of authority to control the subject
Of slavery be found except the implied power growing
out Of the ninth section Of the first article prohibit the
importation Of slaves after 1903 Nor docs II contain any
prohibition the States this subject BIT reccgn'ss
slavery in the &es. (Secton two OF article four) fol-
lows nasmuch there power the subject dele
gated TO the United States nor prohibited TO the States
II is reserved the States the people and therefore
the restriction imposed by act Of Congress was Illegal and
void
To impose the Missouri restriction the South under
the prctext Of contract compact conPronsc would be
gross fraud upon her rights II cannot be questioned,
when southern members Of Congress accepted the line Of
3s deg 30 they distinctly understood that at least all
the territory south Of that line acquired from France should
remain open for the admission Of snves Nor can it be
questioned that in every instance in which objection could
be made in Congress to the admission Of slavery south of
that line northern gentlemen have objected earnestly
upon any open subject Putting the mdcst construction
these hcts they prove that the parties to the alleged
contract did understand and assent to 1t in the
that not asrnted 10 by either party ns the
other understood that there was not concurrence Of
intention in the parties The legal consequences
sultng thercrom will he seen by brief reference 10 the
law Of the ft