Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1854-02-15

consequences OF IlelF own
Then, sir, as before remarked, the defeat oi
the Missouri compromise in l84S having created
the necessity for the establishment Of a new one
in 1850, let us see what that compromise was.
The leading feature OF the compromise of 1850
was congressional non-intervention as to slavery
in the Territories that the people of the Terrific
res, and OF al! the States, were 10 be allowed to
do as they pleased upon the subject OF slavery,
subject only to the provisions of the Constitution
of the United States
That, sir, was the leading feature of the compro-
mise measures of 1850. Those measures there
fore, abandoned the idea Of a geographical line as
the boundary between free States and slave States;
abandoned it because compelled to do it from an
inability to maintain it; and in lieu of that substi
tuted great principle of selfgovernment, which
would allow the people to do as they thought
proper Now, the question is, when that new
compromise, resting upon that great fundamental
principle of freedom, was established, was it moi
an abandonment OF the old one-the geographic
cal line! Was it not supersedure of the old one
within the very language Of the substitute for the
bill which is now under consideration! | say it
did supersede it, because it applied its provisions
as we'll to the north to the south of SO deg. 80
min. 1t established principle which was equal
y applicable to the country north as we'll as south
of the parallel of SO deg. 80 NINA principle OF
universal application. The authors OF this aboli-
ton manifesto attempt to refutesthis presumption,
and maintain that the compromise of 1850 did not
supersede that of 1920, by quoting the provso to
the first section Of the act to establish the Texan
boundary, and establish the Territory of New
Mexico. That provso was added by way OF
amendment, on motion by Mr.. MASON, ofVirginia.
repeat, that in order to rebut the presumption,
as before stated, that the Missouri compromise
was abandoned and superseded by the principles
of the compromise of 1850 these confederates cite
the following amendment, offered to the bill to
establish the boundary Of Texas and create the
Territory ofNew Mexico in 1850:
"Provided, That nothing herein contained shall
be construed to impair or qualify anything con
tanned in the third article OF the second section
the Joint resolution for annexing Texas to the
United States, approved March l, l845, either as
regards the number of States that may hereafter
be formed out of the State Of Texas or other
wise"
After quoting this proviso, they make the fol-
lowing statement, and attempt to gain credit for
its truth by suppressing material facts which ap-
pear upon the face of the same statute, and if pro-
duced, would concIusvely disprove the state
ment
at is solemnly declared in the very compro-
mise acts that nothing herein contained shall be con-
strued to impair qualify the prohibition of slave
ry north of 36 deg. 80 min. and yet in the face of
this declaration, that sacred prohibition is said to
| be overthrown. Can presumption further go!'
| will now proceed to show that presumption
could not 90 further than is exhibited in this dec
| laraton.
They suppress the following material facts,
which, if produced, would have disproved their
statement: They first seppress the fact that the
same section of the act cuts off from Texas, and
cedes to the United States, all that part of Texas
which lies north of 36 deg. 80 min. They then
suppress the further fact that the same section oil
the law cut off from Texas large tract of coun-
try on the west, more than three degrees of Ion
gitude, aud added it to the territory of the United
States. They then suppress the further fact that
this territory thus cut off from Texas, and to
which the Missouri compromise line did apply,
was incorporated into the Territory of New Mex
leo. And then what was done! 1t was incor-
porated into that Territory with this clause:
"That when admitted as State, the said Ter
rtory, or any portion of the same, shall be receiv
ed into the Union with or without slavery, as
their constitution may prescribe at the time of its
adoption"
Yes, sir, the very bill and section from which
they quote cuts off all that part of Texas which
was to be free by the Missouri compromise, to
gether with some on the south side OF the line
Incorporates it into the Territory OF New Mexi
CO, and then says that that Territory, and every
portion of the same, shall come into the Uniol
with or without slavery, as it sees proper.
What else does it do! The sixth section 0
the same act provides that the legislative powe
and authority of this said Territory of New Mex
leo shall extend to all righttul subjects of ldgis
lation consistent with the Constitution of thu
United States and the provisions of the act no
excepting slavery. Thus the New Mexican bill
from which they make that quotation, contained
the provision that New Mexico, including tina
I part of Texas which was cut off, should come in
to the Union with or without slavery, as it saw
proper; and in the mean time that the Territorial
Legislature should have all the authority over th
subject of slavery that they had over any othe
subject, restricted only by the limitations of th
Constitution of the United States and the provi
sons Of the act. Now I ask those Senators, d
not those provisions repeal the'Missouri comprom
ise so far as it applied to that country cut of fror
Texas! Do they not annul it! Do they nc
supersede it! IF they do, then the address whic
has been put forth to the world by these confede
rates is an atrocious falsehood. If they do no
then what do they meau when they charge m
with having, in the substitute first reported fror
} the committee, repealed it, with having annulle
, it, with having violated it, when | only cope
, those precise words! | copied the precise wore
: into my bill as reported from the commltte
which were contained in the New Mexico BILL
They say my bill annuls the Missouri compron
: Use. Ifit does, it had already been done befol
by tie act of 1850, tor these words were copie
: from the act of 1850. @ Rss.4ts e.ss.
e Mr.. WADE. Why did you do it over again!
e Mr.. DOUGLAS. Twill come to that point pre-
, emily, and explain why we did it over again.
E am now dea.ing with the truth and veraclty OF
t combination of men who have assembled in 81
e eret caucus upon the Sabbath day, to arraign m
: conduct and belle my character say, therefor
! that their manifesto is slander either way; for
1 says that the Missouri compromise was not S,
S perseded by the measures Of 1850, and then
! says that the same words in my bill do repeal al
r annul it, They must be adjudged guilty of Of
falsehood in order to sustain the other assertion
+ Now, sir, Ipropose to go little further, al
e show what was the real meaningof the amen
: ment of the Senator from Virginia, out of whit
It these gentlemen have manufactured so much ca
/ ital in the newspaper press and have succeed