The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-24

uOnt, HOEhlDg more, should,
IN my judgment, nave been restored TO the position
which occupied beofe the passage OF the Missouri
act Upon what ground does the South claim its repeal,
and upon what ground u Il conceded TO US lei me ask
honorable gentlemeni We claim It's repeal because
originally, as said before, il passed in violation OF
the constitution, and IN derogaton oil rights and IL
10 be repealed that we be restored 10 the rights
which we had before II was passed III we not restored
to those rights, submit oyou Mr. President, and 70 The
country the repeal OF il is not worth rush TO us Why
should we work ourselves into passion, excite the
country, and revive all this slavery agitation upon mere
abstraction - and hold thai abstraction, unless
we are resloredto he rights we had In the Territory be-
fore the passage OF the Missouri Compromise. IL we get
nothing BY The repeal why repeal ~ dare say thai The Me-
braska bill stands, IN the minds OF southern people to-day
as II stood 10 yours and mine al The beginnings
simple proposition 10 repeal the Missouri Compromise
and nothing more. When the distinguished author OF
The bill Mr.. DoUGLAsl came forward with his amend
men-the one which the senator from North Carolina
read this morning. and which would reproduce had
il before mel hesiaiea long to whether would vote
for it, IL doing litils scra than fS we bad con
racted do in The beannlng; bot finding older senator's
men OF more experiences, more learning, more ab'y IN
every waydsposed 60 for it, tnaly gave up my OBJ
)eciions.
besitated sir, because, among other things. in
departure from the original liberal and just purpose
OF restoring TO The posuon had before the act OF
1920 II had the right TO introduce slaves INTO this
territory before the restriction act o 1890 the repeal o
thai act would have restored us TO that right The
amendment moved by The senator IRON Illinois seemed
10 me 10 be denial OF that restoration But, as THIS
construction did not meet the sanction OF older sem
ators, abandoned IT, My anxiety to act in harmony
with my southern friends gave easier impulse 10 my
decision Imagine my surprise when heard the senator
from North Carolina gravely eoDending that the amend
men proposed by The senator from Illinois precluded the
idea OF restoring the South 10 It's original position, and
that his proviso only expressed IN language more dls
tnct, what had already been expressed IN adopting the
amendment OF the senator irem Illinois.
Allow me 10 say, Mr. President, that by no means
concur with the senator's from North Carolina and ViI-
ginia thar this bill is all the South has ever asked
their reading OF il is correcti falls mmeasurabIg short
M. has skel To ba latta in
the enjoyment OF all her nghtsnot 10 be egsated into
out OF the Territories. In 1920 Congress legislaed
hef OF Nebraska In 1854 it is proposed TO repeal this
unjust leg station, and her 10 her lost position
But ibe senator from linols comes forward With an
amendment, which the senator from North Carolina in
ssts precludes this idea ii take il for granted
questions that but for the OF 1920 the southern people
could have introduced slavery into this lerltory) The
idea Of restoring The French laws by repeating the Mis-
souri, act is wholly dspeed, we are Ioa, by the language
Of the amendment FIRST proposed Bui 10 make assurance
douby sure, the senator from North Carolina brings in
his proviso which says, in terms, that law existing
pro 10 1920, giving sanction o. protection 10 slavery in
these Territories, shall be revived put in orce. Sup
pose there laws in these Territories prior 10 1920
sanciioning and protecting slavery as think there were
and that yon repealed them by the act OF 1920 you
did, what does Justice demand oil you now3 Not to
leglsaie slavery into the counryno asks that-bu
10 repeal repeating and put back where you
found us. This would be non-inlervenllon But II is
not non intervention for you 10 keep IN force The laws
OF Mexico, which abolished slavery in Utah and New
Mexico and to repeal the laws OF France, which ,ole
raj, d slavery IN Nebraska and Kansas. r.ts
cansot with my friend from North Carolina
in the opinion that in the simple ACT Of repeating the
Mssouf Compromise and thereby restoring the laws in
force before us passage, (admi,ing that those laws
sanctioned aud protected savery) we should be legisa
ting slavery into the country We found laws IN toTce
there sanconing slavery, repealed those laws IN
1890 II in 1854 we repeal the repeating act and thereby
place the original Law in force, the case will stand as If
had not acted al ALL So far from iegislang slavery
into the country we shall simply leave things where
we found them.
Mr. in fnrt he pndf of he
senator from Illinois, stood on The outer OF The
preeipee One hairs breadth further iel would put
me overheard. When the senator from North Carolina
brought forward bis proviso, said promptly would not
vote Tor it The senator has explained that Il makes
alteration in the text OF The bill had been amended
la this he aud differ But suppose il does not, then
why ask TO vote Tor it II il left where stood
tDeiote, why was II urged upon us
fell al the time that 1T was another concession; that
1t was still another and wider departure from the original
purpose of the bilthe simple purpose OF repeating the
Missouri ae and leaving the South where found
her; and regarding it, could not consent 10 vote
for IT II the South is restored to her position, Is
IL not mockery to talk about nonntervention She
has lost her position In The Territories, and by the acts Of
Congress- and by those alone. She bad protection Tor
slaves BY virtue Of the French laws prior 1870 10 these
Territories. You took itawsy by the act OF 1890 You
only do not restore this specific right IN 1854 bat you
have said, many words shall not be restored
beg leave TO dissent from another view Of this subject
taken by the distinguished senator IRON North Carolina,
but-no will not pursue the discussion, | simply rose
10 give the which influenced in voting against
the pToyiso OF my friend from North Carolina elt
called upon 10 do this from the The de had
taken this mornings and having done this, and not
desiring widen The helj Of debate By the Introduction
OF new TOPICS take my seat
! Mr.. CLAYTON. My honorable friend from South
Carolina Mr.. butler has appealed 10 for the cor
rectness OF his statement in regad TO the compromise OF
l54S; and II bad no other ,liye for rising
swer his question: my profound respect for bin would
induce speak He says and says truly, that al The
lime that compromise proposed BY the predicate
OF northern men was that Whatever compromise should
be entered Oto the Mexican law should not be repealed
The member oi tbe committee that compromise who
hrsl made The objection, thai The territorial legislature
should baye u q tbeif power 10 legsate slavery
Mr. Phelps Of Vermont He said my irepd has stated
put nto operation government under hls auspices and
direction Will he not appoint governor and Judges 10
repeal the Mexican law which prohibits slaveTy in Cal-
fornia aud New Msxcoln
Mr. Cahoun's vieN was that no power should or could
be conferred on any territorial legislature either 10
tablish prohibit slavery 10 he Tenory. Heheld thai
The constitution Of the United States necessarily extend
ed The Territories soon az they acquired,
whether by eXpcss enactment 81 law without and
thst therefore, controlled and repealed TIE Mexican
law existing and before the acquisition oi the
qneted aud purchased country. Ia these views OF MT
Calhoun southern uealiemen who voted for the bill gen
erally coucured But the senator from North Carolina
III Mr. BADGER opposed he bill and opposed this opinion
lie held that the iace of the MeNran law, IN the
carried TO the Territories and he therefore disseDted
from those who proposed, by the bill 10 send the ques
| ton oi law 10 the courts,
Il s no part Of my purpose 10 discuss the amendment
10 the Nebraska h proposed by my friend, the senator
from North Carolina, Mr.. BADeEa.) That amendment
provided IN substance that The bill should not be held
10 revive any pflor law which had established slavery
Ia, ~ 1