The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1854-04-15

that media! as evidence that Henry Clay was
the author Of the act of l320y
Mr.. Seward | answer the senator in this
way: that Henry Clay, while lie said he did
not dsavow or disapprovc of that compro-
mise, transferred the merit of it to others
who were more active in procuring it than
he, while no had enjoyed the praise and the
glory which were due from it.
Mr., Douglas. To that have only to say
that it cannot be the reason; for Henry Clay
in that speech, did take to himself the merit
of the compromise of 1921, and hence il
could not have been modcsty which made
him disayow the other. He said that ne did
not know whether he had voted for the act
of 1890 or not; but he supposed he had done
so. He furthermore said that if it did not
originate in the House of which he was
member, and that he never did approve Of
its principles; but that he may have voted,
and probably did vote for it, under the press
urc Of the circumstances.
Now, Mr.. President, rs have been doing
Justice to Mr.. Clay on this question, perhaps
| may as well do justice TO another great man,
who was associated with him in carrying
throngh the great measures Of 1880, which
mortified the senator rom New York so
much, they defeated his purpose of carrying
on the agitation. ! allude to Mr.. Webster,
The authority Of his great name has been
quoted for the purpose of proving that he
;rro,o,,.b,o cn,n,oc, E,;Ion,lv thc ds,in.
guiah.d Senator from Massachusetts, Mr.. Ev-
EHvrl supposed he was doing Mr.. Webster
cniirc justice when he quoted the passage
which he read from Mr. Wcbstcr's speech of
he stood unon m. nosi,ion th, ovrsv uort
Of the American continent wos fixed for free.
dom or for slavery hy ;rrepcalable law.
The senator saws that, BY the expression
"icrcpcalable law" Mr.. Webster meant to
include the COMPROMISE of 1920. Now,
/ will show that that was no, Mr. Wcbstcr's
mcanino-that he was meyer entity Of the
mistake of SAVING that TN, Missouri ,rt If
/ 1870 was an irrcnool,hlo law Mr. Webster
! said in that sncch that every foot of terrific.
/ ~ in uhe United Strt.s was fixed as 20 il,
/ character for freedom or for SLAVERY by an
/ irrtpcalablc law. He then inquired if il was
/ not so in regard To Texas? He went on TO
prove that il was: because, he said there
/ was a conpnct in EXPRESS terms between
Texas the United States. lie said the
parties were capablc Of contracting. aud that
! there wns n valuable consideration; and
hence. he contendcd. that in that case there
was A contract binding in hopnr, and morals,
and law. and that it was irrcpcalablc with
ont a breach Of faith
He went on To- say:
"Nnw M TO California and Now Mexico. |
hold slavery TO be excluded from those Ter.
rtorics by a law even superior 10 that which
I :. 4
hct law O. nature, of physical geography the
law of the formntion Of tn earth
! That was the i'm, aC"labc law which h said
urohihitpl slavery in the 4 c"ritcri' If tab
and New ,xjco lie nrytw, ut on to speak
of the urol,i'ition r. slavery in Oregon, and
he said il was an .,ntircly usc'cr. and, in
that conncyiout scnsclcss nroyiso."
He went further. and said.
sTLat the who, territory of the States in
the United States or in the ncyly.,cu,lircd
territory Of the United States has a fixed and
settled character now fixed and settled by
law which cunno, he rcnc,lcd in the case 81
Texas without violation Of public faith and
cannot be repealed by any human POWER in
regard 10 California or New Mexico that,
uspru ONE OR THE OTHER or rgrsr LAWS. CIV.
cry foo, ortcrritorv in the States. or in the
Territories has now received a fixed and de.
cidrd character"
What irr,ucolablc laws9 some or the
other" of those which he .al stated One
WAS the Texas comuact the other the law of
nature and physical r,o,ra,hy. and he con.
tended that one or the other iiy,d the char.
act,r Of the whole American continent fnr
.,.l,nm ar e.; Livery i,r never alluded
to the Missouri eomurom;sc. unless il wa,
H.. ~ ,l,,,s; :, ,,,i U-;,, =, ,hc
d., in ,,,I ,,,''., .a;i :, no., =, ,,.o-
l,., and ~ ,ha, ,.a,,,oy;on sa,,,,l 49, ,I,;n,,
w." ,,.a, i, -, ,I,ir,g n.,on,, !,
&C.,, ro'ono',;n,, ,l,o Iau, 81 ,ol. Jcr,,,so
.laycrv b,J ,I,o,d,, hasnnrnb;h;,rdh v nLvs.
;c,i ,,,o,,r,,,i',. l., u'a, u,as III, ,ycr,,;,,
~ W. W,hg,,.,, .rn.,b M, ELECTROMAGNETIC
ni,,,L G,a,n. u,,sa,h,,"',,s NJ Eyrnr.,,
yhn, he ,r,ls ,hn snccch .acoir vii, Inc ut.
,o,I,, a,noycl f. ,.o Lou, bc EI inf, such an
cgr!yi" ,,,' rrror az 10 s',mo.n that Air. Wch.
s,nr IoJ -, c,r III r.r', hi, Kill, ro.;,ion
as ,,'sn,. ,I,a, ,hn U;..nnri act III ID yyo.
,.It,' 49,
NJ rror',, Vim no ,cr,I,,D,r ~. ~ ,yo .
', '',,,': 10 '"N o''S
Mr. DnnyI,s With iron. ,,c,s,rc
A. ry,r7I VIA, / s,iI nn that suI;cc,
WAS ,hat Mr.. Webster in NV opinion. con.
sid,red the Missouri comnroIni.e AS Of the
nature Of a cnnnart II i true. a, thc sen.
,tnr r,o,n IIIiuni. has h,st stated that Mr.
\ Webster made ma olus;on in eyrrcs, terms
to ,h. .ubirct of the Missouri ra.t,i, t,ou.-
Hut / thoE,h. thcn and think pov flat he
referred in GENERAL terms tn thni ns final
settlement Of the question in the rcpion ia
which it apylird il was no, drawn in qucs.
tion ,hrn On either Side Of fine House. No
InIv sn,rcs,cd that il was nj stake. Nobody
intimatrd that there was = Question h, for,
thr senate whether that restriction should
he rcu, al,d or should remain in force. /,
was not distinctly and in terms alluded to.
oS'ithc Gentleman correctly saws, bvMr. Web.
st,r or any bodv els. What he said in ref
err,,c IN T,xa: opp,icd TO Texas alone
What he said In reference TO Utal, and New
Noyiro, annlird to thcm alone and what II,
said with regard TO Oregon. to that Terrific.
ry alone Hut he stated in general terms
. -