Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-02-18
THE ANTI-SLAvERY BUGLE.

which it was contained was submitted by the Pres.
dent to his Cabinet, for their opinion upon the
lconstitutionality Of that prohibition CALHoUr,
+ CRAWFORD and Writ were members Of that Cabi-
net. Each, in written opinion, affirmed its con-
lstitutionaty and the act received the sanction OF
the President Thus we see that the parties to the
arrangement we're the two sections Of the country
the free States one side, the slave States on
the other. The subject of it was, the whole terri.
tory west of the Mississippi, outside Of the State Of
Louisiana and the practical operation OF 1t was,
the division of this territory between the institution
of slavery and the institution Of freedom
II The arrangement was proposed by the slave
States 1t was carried by their votes. A large
majority Of southern Senators voted for it ma
Ority of southern Representatives voted for it, Ii
was approved by all the southern members of the
Cabinet, and received the sanction of southern
President. The compact was embodied in single
bill containing reciprocal provisions. The admis-
sion of Missouri with slavery, and the understand
ing that slavery should not be prohibited by Con-
gress south of 360 30>, were the considerations of
the perpetual prohibition north Of that line. And
f that prohibition was the consideration of the ad-
mission, and the understanding The slave States
received large share of the consideration coming
to them, paid in hand. Missouri was admitted
without restriction by the act ITSELF Every other
part of the compact the part of the free States,
4 has been fulfilled to the letter. No part of the
G compact the part Of the slave States has been
fulfilled at ALL except in the admission Of Iowa and
h the organization Of Minesota; aud now the slave
g States propose to break up the contract without
the consent and against the will Of the free States
upon doctrine Of suporsedure which, il sanction
ed at all, must be inevitably extended to over
throw the existing prohibition of slavery in all the
. organized Territories.
n Let me read to the Senate some paragraphs from
Niles Register, published in Baltimore, March 2l
a 1870, which shows clearly what then the uni
l. versal understanding in respect to this arrange
). ment:
C "Thc territory north of 36o 30/ is orerer' for
g bidden to be peopled with slaves, except in
y the State Of Missouri The right then to inhibit
slavery in any of the Territories is clearly and COM
d petely acknowledged, and it is conditioned as to
d some Of them, that even when they become States,
c slavery shall be ,torere,' prohibited in thcm.-
C There is no hardship in this. The Territories be-
n long to the United States and the Government may
rightfully prescribe the terms on which it will dis
g pose of the public lands. This great point was
agreed to in the Senate, 33 votes to ii and in the
l. House Of Representatives by l34 to AZ. really
IS l39 to 81. And We trust that it is determined
u orere in respect to the countries subject to
I the legislation Of the General Government"
n ask Senators particularly to mark this:
D "H is te Tie compromise is supported only 5y N,
e letter IF The law, reedlaJle by tie authority whcl
It enacted IL; bit The circumstances Of the gre
L this lao MoEAL FORCE equal 10 that Of postir,
G prorisOH Of the Constitution; and ce do not hdzdrC
anything by saying that The Constitution EXISTS in IL
y observance. Both parties have sacrificed much ia
$ Cancellation. We ieish 10 sec tie CONTACT kept /,
o good faith, and we trust that n kind Proyi
D dence will open the way to relieve Of an eyi
ID which every good citizen deprecates the supreme
: curse of the country"
y That sir was the language of Marylander
~ in 1890. lie expressed the universal understand
! ing Of the country. Here then is compact com
~ pletc, perfect, irrepeaable, so far any compac
u can be said to be irrepealable, which is EN-
" bodied in legislative act II had thu
u two sections Of the country for its parties,
~ great Territory for its subject, and q permanen
=, adjustment of dangerous controversy for its oh
u u jcct 1t was forced upon the free States 1t ha
y !, been literally fulfilled by the free States. 1t il
!! binding, indeed, only upon honor and conscience
" but in such matter, the obligations Of honor anC
- - conscience must be regarded as even more sacreC
y than those of constitutional provisions.
y Mr. President, If there any principle whicl
~ prevailed in this arrangement il was that of per
hitting the continuance of slavery in the localitie
where it actually existed at the time Of the acqui
- sition Of the Territory, and prohibiting 1t in th'
> parts of Territory il which slaves were actuall
:. held. This was wide departure from the orig
!. inal policy which contemplated the exclusion o
= slavery from territories in which it actually ex
: listed at the time Of acquisition. But the idea tina
u slavery could ever be introduced into free terri
tory, under the sanction Of Congress, had not, o
"a yet, entered into any mans head.
~ Mr.. President, shall hasten to q conclusion
- In l848 We acquired vast territory from Mexico
- The free States demanded that this territory, ire
~ when acquired, should remain free under tn
t' Government of the United States The Senate
- from Illinois tells us that he proposed the exten
"a sion Of the Missouri compromise line through thi
~ territory, and he complains that II was rejccte
:, by the votes of the free States. So it was. An
= whyl Because the Missouri compromise applie
to territory in which slavery was already allowed
u The Missouri prohibition exempted portion O
70 " this territory, and the larger portion from tn
evil. 1t carried out in respect to that the origna
= policy of the country. But the extension of tina
~ line through the territory acquired from Mexico
&c with the understanding which the Senator fror
- Illinois and his friends attached to it, woul
ie introduce slavery into vast region in whic
~ slavery, at the time Of acquisition, was not allow
70 ed. To agree to it would have been to revers
~ totally the original policy of the country and t
20 20 disregard the principle upon which the Missour
~ compromise was based.
~ 1t is true that when the controversy in respect
- this Territory came to conclusion, the provision
~ of the acts by which territorial governments wer
!! organized were in some respects worse than tina
" proposition Of the Senator. While those bills pre-
tessed to leave the question of slavery SLAYER
" in the Territories unaffected by their provisions
% judicial decision they did, nevertheless, virtual
decide the question for all the territory covered
VI them, far legislation could decide it, agains
=, freedom. California, indeed, was admitted rs
~ free State; and by her admission the scheme Q
y extending line Of slave States to the Pacific wa
N u for the time defeated The principle upon whic
D northern friends of the territorial compromis
~ acts vindcated their support of them was this
y Slavery is prohibited in these Territories by Mex
- lean law that law is not repealed by any provsio
" Of the acts. Indeed, said many of them SLAYER
cannot exist in any Territory, except in virtue
io positive act Of Congress--no such act allow
% slavery there-there is danger, therefore, tina
any slaves will be taken into the Territory South
lc ern supporters Of the sustained them upo
y quite opposite grounds. Under the provisions
W the Federal Constitution they said the slayeholde
. can hold his slaves in any Territory in spite of an
! an act of Congress. The Mexican law forbiddin
l slavery abrogated at the moment of acqusitio
~ by the operation of the Constitution. Congress
II has not undertaken to impose any prohibition
ss We can, therefore, take our slaves there, if W