The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1854-03-15
Congressional.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 81,

Missouri compromise to its present shane.
lie did not wish to disturb the settlement
OF the question Of slavery unnecessarily,
particularly as the Southern Senators had
all avowed that it was only an abstraction.
and that the South had no hope Of slavery
extending to the territories. The Missouri
Compromise had at its day effected set.
Element Of an exciting and dangerous con.
troversy, and he would not have proposed
10 disturb it, but the proposition having
been made he would have to act upon il.
lie made long argument in support Of
his frequently asserted doctrine, that all
political sovereignty in the territories was
vested in the people thereof, and not in
Congress. He denied the doctrine Of the
Southern Senators. that under the equality
secured by the Constitution to all cilizens,
slave holders had the right to carry slaves
90 The territories, and that the local legis.
latures had no power to exclude them.
The term territory had now twofold
moaning. one as applied to land or public
domain, and the other as applicable to
political organization. Over the latter,
Congress had no power; over the former
Congress was sovereign, and all laws.re-
lating 10 the former were as absolute in
the public domain as within State limits,
as in the territories. If the right of slave.
holders 70 take their slaves and settle with
them on the public domain was secured by
the Constitution, why could they not go
with their slaves and cattle upon the public
domain OF the United States in Ohio, or in
other States, as we'll as in the territories?
Il i was right secured by the Consti,u-
ton of the United States, no State law or
constitution could set il aside. lie argued
that the idea that the slaves were indispcn.
sable to the comfort of the Southern peo.
Rls removing elsewhere could not be m main.
tained for q moment. The territory &C.
quired from Mexico was now, so far as
Congressional action was concerned in ex-
sctly the same condition respecting slavery
ss il was when acquired.
= The prohibition of il not in California
was NOT an act of Congress, but by the ex-
ercise OF the right Of the people there TO de.
termine the question for themselves
Slsyeholders had no more right to com.
plain Of inability 10 take their property
there than others. Northern men could
not remove their farms, nor their corporate
isanchises, nor many Of the dearest and
tenderest attachments with them to the ter
riiories or TO California. Northern and
Sbpthern people were alike compelled TO
turn their property into money aud thus
Feemoye, il. When they got to the new
country, the northern and southern men
were both entitled 10 do and to have all
things allowed to other citizens in those
e9mmunities. This was the equality Sc
cured by the Con nsiitulion.
.a5r. Cass read statistics showing how
eoInRaratively few were the Shareholders
Slsyery was an evil, but he was for leaving
i with the Southern people, and using no
feProaches. The South was too sensitive,
and SoWetimes require of Northern men
700 much. lie had voted ag gainst the pro-
vision in The fugitive slave act for the abuse
OF the habeas corpus. and for the trial by
{. Jury Of the slave in the place where cap
tured. bpl he had urged the simple pro-
vision that on the return OF tho slave to
the, South. he should have jury trial if he
'ssked for it. This the South un unanimously
rnfused. Therefore il was that he had re.
fused 10 vote for the bill. The South had
no regard for the northern man who did
not 60 for all they demanded. lie would
yote for This bill. lie believed the Missouri
prohibition unconstitutional, but as it was
70 be repealed. he would prefer to declare
i e, be unconstitutional; therefore repeal
j. Unless this matter was declared to be
Aecided upon constitutional grounds, it
would never be settled in the public mind.
Ills doctrine Of Congressional non-inter-
yention had once been denied by Mr..
Calhoun and the whole South. He had
liyed, to sec it adopted as the only safe
shield to- the Constitution. Though he
would not offer any amendment TO the bill,
Iothers offered them 10 carry oul the prin-
oiples Of popular sovereignty by giving the
people Of the territories right to select
their own officers, he would vote for them.
ua met the objection that il Congress had
no power over the territories, how could
i delegate to territorial legislature, by
asserting that Congress- could delegate
many. powers it could not exercise. 1t
could authorize the people of the terrific.
yies to- call q convention and frame State
Constitution, but it could not exercise that
power and frame State Constitution. He
elaborated all these points st considerable
lenga. .e4aa asi 81 aEeee
hus fsttsf = eas.a A------9e76 sFt
yp ayiss,tss.s WASHINGTON, March A..
SENATE.-The Senate continued in ses.
sion ALI might. At o'clock this morning
.sbe Nebraska Bill was passed by Q vote ol
s:37 yeas to IA noes. The debate was very
warm, and exciting words passed between
Made, Chase, Seward and Sumner, and
the advocates of the bill.
Mr.. Chase characterized the bill as bid
for the Presidency, on part Of its author
Eso;Ars Douglass replied, and said in reier.
epce 10 Mr.. Chase, that he, Douglass, has
seessr; held any: Office, nor did he get 10 the
.Senate by corrupt bargains, he had never
g0tto the Senate by putting his principles
.eharactes and honor at public auction fol
votes. he owed his place TO no corrupt bar.
vgaipsor coalition. ~ -
:, aM Mr., Weller-Bu others do.
va Mr. Chase-Do you say came here by
corrupt bargains?
ed, Mr- Douglass said the man who charged
ssse with, having brought in this bill as a
bid for the Presidency. did come here by
s.sgFrupt bargain Did you mean me? i