Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-03-17


Washingtar Sentinel.
NEBRASKA AND KANSAS.
SPEECH OF HON. 9. A. DOUGLAS,
OF ILLINOIS,
In Senate, Friday, March 3, 1854.
CONTINUED.
Sir, ifthis was a compact, what must be thought
of those who violated it almost Immediately after
it was formed say it was calumny upon the
north to say that it was q compact should feel
flush of shame upon my cheek, as q northern
man, if were to say that it was compact, and
that the section of the country to which belong
received the consideration, and then repudiated
the obligation in eleven months after 1t was en-
tered INTO l deny that II was compact in any
of the term. But if it was, the record proves
that faith was not observed that the contract was
never carried into effect; that after the north had
procured the passage Of the act prohibiting sla-
very in the Territories, with majority in the
House large enough to prevent its repeal, Mis-
souri, was refused admission into the Union as
slaveholding State, in conformity with the act Of
March 6, 1920. If the proposition be correct, as
contended for by the opponents of this bill, that
there was solemn compact between the north
and south that in consideration of the prohibition
of slavery in the Territories Missouri was to be
admitted into the Union in conformity with the
act of 1920, that compact was repudiated by
the north and rescinded by the joint action of the
two parties within twelve months from its date.
Missouri was never admitted under the act of the
9th of March, 1920. She was refused admission
under that act. She was voted out of the Union
by northern votes, notwithstanding the stipulation
that she should be received; and, in consequence
Of these facts, new compromise was rendered
~r
to be admitted into the Union condtionaly-
mitted on condition not embraced in the act of
1890, and, in addition, to full compliance with
all the provisions of said act. IT, then, the act of
1920, by the eighth section of which slavery was
prohibited in Missouri, was a compact, it is clear
to tho comprehension of every fair-mnded man
that the refusal of the north to admit Missouri, in
compliance with its stipuatons, and without fur
ther conditions, imposes upon us high moral
obligation to remove the prohibition of slavery in
the Territories, since it has been shown to have
been procured upon condition never performed.
Mr. President, inasmuch as the senator from
New York has taken great pains to impress upon
the public mind of the north the conviction that
the act of 1920 was solemn compact, the viola
ton or reputation Of which by either party in
wolves perfdy and dishonor, wish to call the
attention of that senator Mr.. SEWARD to the
fact, that his own State was the first to repudiate
the compact and to instruct her senators in Con-
gress not to admit Missouri into the Union in
compliance with it, nor unless slavery should be
prohibited in the State of Missouri.
Mr.. SEWARD. That is 50.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. / have the resolutions be-
fore me. in the printed Journal of the Senate.
The senator from New York is familiar with the
fact, and frankly admits it
/" STATE OF New YORK.
In ASSEMBLY, NoOember, 13, 1890.
" Whereas the legislature Of this State, at the
last session. did instruct their senators and request
-
admission, as State into the Union, Of any ter
rlory not comprised within the original bounda-
ries ofthe United States, without making the pro-
hibition of slavery therein an Indispensable condi-
ton of admission; and whereas this Legislature is
impressed with the correctness of the sentiments
so communicated 10 our senators and representa-
tives Therefore,
g Resoired, (if the honorable the Senate concur
herein,) That this legislature does approve of the
principles contained in the resolutions of the last
session; and further, if the provisions contained
in any proposed constitution of new State deny
to any citizens Of the existing States the privi-
leees and immunities of citizens of such new
State that such proposed constitution should not
be accepted or confirmed; the same, in the opin-
ion Of this legislature being void by the Constitu-
ton of the United States. And that our senators
be instructed, and our representatives in Congress
be requested, TO their utmost exertions TO pre-
. vent the acceptance and confirmation Of any such
constitution"
previous session the New York legislature had
INSTRUCTED" the senators from that State ssTo
OPPOSE THE ADMISSION, AS A STATE, INTO THE
UNION OF ANY TERRITORY not comprised within
the original boundaries of the United States, WITH
OUT MAKING THE PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY
THEREIN AN INDISPENSABLE CONDITION OF AD-
MISSION.
These instructions are not confined to territory
north of $50 3O. They apply, and were intended
to apply, to the whole country west Of the Misss-
sippi, and to all territory which might hereafter
be acquired. They deny the right of Arkansas
to admission as slayeholdng State, as well as
Missouri They lay down q general principle to
be applied and insisted upon everywhere, and in
all cases, and under all circumstances. These
resolutions were first adopted prior to the passage
of the act of March 6, 1920, which the senator
now chooses to call compact. But they were re-
newed and repeated on the 18th of November,
1920, little more than eight months after the
adoption Of the Missouri compromise, as nstruc-
tions to the New York senators to resist the ad-
mission Of Missouri as slaveholding State, not
withstanding the stipulations in the alleged com
pact. Now, let me ask the senator from New
York by what authority he declared and published
in his speech that the act of 1920, was a compact
which could not be violated or repudiated without
a sacrifce Of honor, justice, and good faith Per-
haps he will shelter himself behind the resolutions
of his State, which he presented this session,
branding this bill as a violation Of pghted faith.
lI.
word of explanation,
Mr. DOUGLAS. Certainly, with great deal
Of fpleasure.
Mr.. SEWARD i wish simply to say that the
State of New York, for now thirty years, has re-
fused to make any compact on any terms by
which a concession should be madefor the extern
sion Of slavery. But, by the practical action of
the Cosrress of the United States, compromises
have Been made which, It is held by the honora-
BILE senator from Illinois and by the south, bind
her against her consent and approval. And there
fore she stands throughout this whole matter up
on the same pround--always refusing to enter in
to compromise, always insisting upon the pro-
hibtion Of slavery within the Territories of the
United States. But on this occasion, we stand
here with contract which has stood for thirty
years, notwithstanding our protest and dissent,
and in which there is nothing left to be fulfilled
except that part which is to be beneficial to us.
All the rest has been fulfilled, and we stand here
with our old opinions on the whole subject oi
compromises, demanding fulfllment on the part Of
the south, which the honorable senator from iii.
~ - - .t.--.L #