Grand River times. [volume] (Grand Haven, Mich.) 1851-18??, 1854-03-15
GEN CASS ON THE NEBRASKA
RJTI rrf

BILL.
Gen. Cass addressed the Senate on Monday
last, upon the Nebraska and Kansas bills The
following is the telegraphic synopsis Of his re-
marks
Mr.. Cass said he preferred the bill as original
ly reported, without the repeal OF the Missouri
compromise, to its present shape. lie did not
wish to disturb that settlement unnecessarily,
particularly as Southern Senators had all ayow-
ed that it was only an abstraction, the South hav-
ing no hope of slavery going to the Territopes.
The Missouri compromise had in its day effect
ed the settlement Of an exciting and dangerous
controversy, and he would not have proposed to
disturb it !; but the proposition having been
made, he would have TO act on it. He made a
long argument in support This frequently assert
ed doctrine that all political sovereignty in Ter
ritories was in the people thereof, and not in
Congress. He denied the doctrine of Southern
Senator's that under the equality secured by
the constitution to all citizens, shareholders had
the right to carry Slaves to the Territories, and
the local legislature had no power to exclude
them. Territory had now two.fold meaning
--one as applied to land or public domain--the
other as to political organization. Over the lat
ter Congress had no power Over the former
Congress was sovereign, and all laws relating TO
the former were as absolute in public domain
within State limits as in territories. If the right
of shareholders to take their slaves and settle
with them on public domain was secured by the
constitution, why could they not 90 with their
slaves and settle upon public domain Of the U.
States in Ohio or other States, as well as in the
Territories? If it was right secured by the
constitution of the United States, no State law
or constitution could set it aside. He argued
that the idea that slaves were indispensable to
the comfort Of Southern people removing else
where, could not be maintained for moment
The territory acquired from Mexico, was now,
so far as Congressional action was concerned, in
exactly the same condition respecting slavery, rs
it was when acquired. The prohibition of it in
California was not the act of Congress, but by
the exercise of the right of the people there to
determine the question for themselves. Slave
holders had no more right to complain of nabil-
ity to take their property there, than others
Northern men could not remove their farms nor
their corporate franchises, nor many of their
dearest and tenderest attachments with them to
the Territories or to California. Northern and
Southern people were alike compelled to turn
their property into money and thus remove it,
When they got TO new country, Northern and
Southern men, both were entitled to do and
have all things allowed to other citizens in those
communities. This was the equality secured
by the constitution. He read statistics showing
how comparatively few were Shareholders
Slavery was an evil, but he was for leaving it
with the Southern people, and using no reproach-
es. The South was too sensitive and sometimes
required of Northern men to much. be had vo-
ted against the provisions in the Fugitive Slave
act for the abuse of habeas corpus, and for trial
by jury Of the slave in the place where captur-
ed but he had urged the simple provision that
q Al. Al. 4
have jury trial if he asked it.
This the South unanimously refused, and
therefore it was he had refused to vote for the
BILL The South had no federation for a North
ern man who did not 90 for all they demanded.
lie would vote for this BILL He believed the
Missouri prohibition unconstitutional but, as
it was to be repealed, he would prefer to declare
it unconstitutional, and therefore repeal it. Un-
less this matter was declared decided upon con-
stitutional grounds, it would never be settled in
the public mind. His doctrine of Cong ression-
al non-ntervention had once been derided by
Calhoun and the whole South. He had lived
to see it adopted as the only safe shield to the
constitution. Though he would not offer any
amendments to the bill, if others offered them to
carry out the principle of popular sovereignty,
by giving the people Of the Territories the right
to select their own officers, he would vote for
them. He met the objection that if Congress
had no power over the Territories, how could
it delegate it to the Territorial Legislature by
asserting that Congress could delegate many
powers it could not exercise! 1t conld author
ize the people of Territories to call convention
and frame State constitution, while it could
not exercise that power. He elaborated all these
points at considerable length.
DEPoPULATIoN OF THE SANDWICH ISLANDS,