Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-02-06

the authority Of Henry Clay-that departed
statesman, in respect to whom whatever may
be the differences of political opinion, none
question that among the great men Of this
country, he stood proudly eminent. Did he
in the report made by him as chairman Of the
Committee of Thirteen, or in any speech in
support Of the Compromise acts, or in any con-
yersation in the committee, or out Of the COM
mittee, ever even hint at this doctrine Of su-
persedure? Did any supporter or any oppo-
nent of the Compromise acts ever vlndicate or
condemn upon the ground that the Missouri
prohibition would be affected by them2 Well,
sir, the Compromise acts were passed. They
were denounced North, and they were de-
nounced South. Did any defender Of them
at the South ever justify his support Of them
upon the ground that the South had obtained
through them the repeal Of the Missouri pro-
hibition Did any objector to them at the
North ever even suggest AZ ground OF con-
demnation that that prohibition was swept
away by them? No, sir! No man, North or
South, during the whole Of the discussion Of
those acts here or in that other discussion
which followed their enactment throughout
the country, ever intimated any such opinion.
Now, sir, lot us come to the last session Of
Congress. A Nebraska bill passed the House,
and came to the Senate and was reported
from the Committee on Territories by the SEN
ator from Illinois, as it's chairman. Was there
any provision in it which even squinted to-
wards this notion Of repeal by supersedure?
Why, sir, Southern gentlemen opposed it upon
the very ground that it left the Territory I'M
der the operation Of the Missouri prohibition.
The Senator from Illinois made a speech in
Iaf Of a
port, upon the ground that it superseded the
Missouri prohibition Not at ALL Was il OPP
posed or vindicated by anybody on any such
ground Every Senator knows the contrary.
The Senator from Missouri, Mr. Atohisop,l
now the President Of this body, made speech
upon the bill, in which he distinctly declared
that the Missouri prohibition was not repeal
ed and could not be repealed
will send this speech to the Secretary, and
ask him to read the paragraphs marked.
The Secretary read, as follows:
81 will now state to the Senate the views
which induced me to oppose this proposition in
the early part Of the session.
81 had two objections to it. One was that
the Indian title in that Territory had not been
extinguished or, ut least very small portion
OF it had been. Another was the Missouri
Compromise, or, as it is commonly called, the
Slavery restriction. 1t was my opinion at that
time--and am not now very clear on that
subject-that tho law of Congress, when the
State Of Missouri was admitted into the Union
excluding Slavery from the Territory of Louisi-
ana north OF 36 deg. 80 min, would be enforced
in that Territory, unless it was specially re-
scinded; and, whether that law was in accord
ance with the Constitution Of the United States
or not it would do its work, and that work
would DO to preclude shareholders from going
into that Territory. But when came to look
into that question, found there was no pros
pect, no hope, of repeal Of the Missouri Com
promise, excluding Slavery from that Territory.
Now, sir, am free to admit, that at this mo-
mcnt at this hour, and for all time to come,
should oppose the organization or the settle
ment of that Territory unless my constituents,
and the constituents Of the whole South of the
slave States Of tho Union, could 90 into it upon
the same footing, with equal rights and equal
privileges, carrying that species Of property
with them as other people Of this Union. Yes,
sir, acknowledge that that would have gov
erned me- but | have no hope that the restric-
ton will over be repealed.
81 have always been of opinion that the first
great error committed in the political history
of this country was the Ordinance of 1887, rem.
dering the Northwest Territory free territory.
The next great error was the Missouri Com
promise. But they are both irremediable.
There is no remedy for them. We must SUBJ
NIT to them. am prepared to do it. II is
evident that tie Missouri Compromise cannot
be repealed. So. far rs that question is con.
cernod, We might as well agree to the admission
of this Territory now as next year, or five or
ten years henceo--Congressional Globe, Second
Session, Thirty second Congress, DOL. 26, page
1113.
Mr.. CHASE. That, sir, is the speech of the
Senator from Missouri, whose authority, |
think, must 20 for something on this question.
What does he say? "When came TO look into
Missouri prohibtion--that was the question he
was looking into--a found that there was no
prospect, no hope, of repeal of the Missouri
Compromise excluding Slavery from that Ter.
ritory.D And yet, sir, mt that very moment,
according to this new doctrine OF the Senator
from Illinois, il had been repealed three years
Well, the Senator from Missouri said, further,
that IL no thought il possible TO oppose this re-
striction successfully, he never would consent
to tho organization OF the Territory until il
was rcscinded But said he acknowledge
that have no hope that the restriction will
ever be repealed. Then he made some COM
plant, rs other Southern gentlemen have fire.
qucntly done, Of the Ordinance Of 1887, and
the Missouri prohibition but went on to say,
they are both irremediablc there is no rem
cdy for them we must submit to them am
prepared TO do it; IL is evident that tho Mis-
souri, Compromise cannot be repealed"
Now, sir, when was this said IL was on the
morning Of tho 4th Of March, Just before the
close Of the last session when that Nebraska
bill, reported by the Senator from Illinois,
which proposed no repeal and suggested no
supcrscdure, was under discussion. | think,
sir, that MI this shows pretty clearly that up
to the very closc OF the last session Of Congress-
nobody had ever thought Of repeal by super
eedurc. Then, what took place ut the com
menccment Of the present session? The Sena-
tor from Iowa, early in December, introduced
q bill for the organization Of the Territory of
Nebraska believe il was tho same bill which
was under discussion here Mt the last session.