Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-06-03

which I put; and I would not have asked such
question OF the honorable Senator, though / viii not
complain of it. shall have occasion perhaps to explain it.
With regard the repeal Of the Missouri compromise upon
constitutional grounds the honorable Senator says voted
for it when offered as amendment That is not
to the question respectfully submit He says his
great object is to the repeal of the Missouri COM
promise, because it unconstitutional act and that
the great principle which he will hazard by voting
for the Clayton amendment. do know whether the
honorable Senator voted for that.
Mr.. TOOMBS. was not here when it was voted upon.
shall vote against it now
Mr.. BELL. The honorable Senator says he win vote
against it now, which implies very strongly think that
he would have voted for il then That brings up what
want to state to the honorable Senators from South Caro-
lima and Virginia Suppose they violating no princi
pe that they are making no sacrifice the honorable
Senator from Illinois and to the Northern gentlemen who
have gonc for this BILL because they eonsder they are
shielded s by the @gs of the Constitution which hereto
fore has protected the rights Of the avehoder n all the
Territories since the Government of the United states was
in operation them by act of Congress- what wanted
to know was why the necessity Of this bill II the Missouri
compromise act unconstitutional As have already
said not in this debate again and again. thought there
warrant in the Constitution to authorize its pas
sage. have said out of the Congress OF the United
States and before the people, perhaps hundred times
that if the South proper to make ON issue upon this
slave question: it should have been done in those times
when there great agitation in the South upon this sub
ect and when these questions came up for consideration
in 18o0-2l That was the time when the South should
have stood by what they considered their rights and
should not have yielded. They were then strong The
North not feeble to be sure but theSouth might
pec to have stood successfully that occasion 1t would
have been at hazard 1t Is true but then was the
time to have made resistance to this measure.
Now, in regard to those gentlemen who conend that
that act unconstitutional and therefore ought to be
repealed when it proclaimed that this principle Of
noninteryenton an important one to be established
in the country or recognised by the Congress of the Uni
ted States why did not they rely upon the protection of
the Constitution? had intended to put the question
whether it not Intervention instead OF noninterven
ton in fact We know that the compromise acts Of 1850
left New Mexico and Utah free territory WE'LL what did
the honorable Senators who hold these extreme opinions
in the South then rely upon What did those who agreed
to that compromise rely upon What did the honorable
Senator from Georgia rely upon that occasion when he
supported those bills? 1t was understand, the de-
sire stand the Constitution, and to establish this
principle of nonnteryenon and to allow the people to
settle and arrange their institutions under that Constitu-
ton. The Territories Of Utah and New Mexico, when
they came into the Unon free Territories by the
law Of Spain and Mexico The question raised whe
ther that really prohibtory whether that was the
condition Of the country and whether slaves could go
there with safety Those who were in favor of the COM
promise bills said, whether they not, will risk
the judicial tribunals in the decision Of the question
Then why if the principle Of on-nervention incor
porated in this BILL as thought it at rst interfere
insist on now what seems to be abstraction the
repeating Of the Missouri compromise after that principle
was adopted by large majority Of the Senate? 1t was
supposed that period of time that slavery might go into
Kansas and Nebraska because it was slave territory by
the laws of the country from which we acquired it. They
did stop with the removal of the Missouri compromise,
but they further went to inerpose or intervene by alb
rogating the effect of the treaty of 1903
But sir do not mean to go into an argument on this
question. to say that, with regard to this
proposition, voted for it before was the close
Of the debate in the Senate onhe bill and at that time
understood that every Southern 6enator vas il
it and when that question mootsd abot The ous
it was believed that bill could be carried through
there that Southern members would not vote for it un-
less that amendment incorporated into 1t; and when
that was voted in did not believe the North would vote
for it, that the BILL as it agreed to by the Senate
presumed could not be carried through the House
Mr. President at that time, well as now, did not
see that there is the interest Importance involved
in the question which the honorable Senator from North
Caroina (Mr. BApaER) the honorable Senator from
Maryland (Mr. PEARoEl conceive to be in this PROPOSE
tion Formerly understood that the bill could not
pass the House There was some question, perhaps,
whether the Clayton amendment in If fully considered
would Mt all events diminish the vote in the Senate
but for the prospect of striking it out in the House Of
Representatives remember very well that was struck
by an argument used by honorable Senator either
from Iowa Wisconsin, which was presented very briefly
1t was asked, when the amendment was moved by the
Senator from Delaware why will you make this invdious
and odious discrimination between the privileges of for
egners going into Minnesota and those going into Ne
braska, which is just adjoining? 1t looks little unrea
sonabe and it is what these people never understand
or comprehend 1t will create feeling, and may lay
the foundation of ill-feeling..
But with the principles OF this bill now, as they stand
incorporated in it, coming from the House without the
Clayton amendment, sent it from the Senate it
be of great Importance whether these people be
admitted to vote in that Territory ornot The difference
is the time that must eapsc between the declaration of
their intentions to become citizens of the United States
and the expiration Of their terms 1t necessarily implies
those very feelings described by the honorable Senator
from Iowa, Mr.. DODGE, think it was before the bill
passed from this body. II considered that it Of
such great Importance the honorable Senators from
North Carolina and Georgia and other Senators have
stated that should risk nothing by the Clayton amend
ment, would vote against it now. If could be
ynced that the condition Of things described by the Sena
from Indiana would arise at another session of Con-
gress and that the common patriotism of the
country, including the South well any portion Of
the North would not forbear press such species Of
legislation as calculated to produce an effect
appalling to every patriot then would not vote for it.
Again. if honorable Senators from the South have made
up their minds that there is principle Of such high i'm
portance involved in this ba principle connected with
the stability Of institutions the integrity of the Con-
stuten and the preservation of the Union-l have no.
thing to say. They right according to their own
judgments and believed that there the high prin
cple alluded to by the honorable Senator from North Ca
rolina, do not think would risk it there. But what
to that if honorable Senator's from the South
hold these opinions that there great Importance to be
attached they say there is to the passage of this BILL
and great and fundamental principle is to be estab
shed by it, then think they ought to vote for this
amendment and understood that was the sense OF
clear majority of Southern gentlemen the subject,
should not vote for it myself butt sir know of no means
Of drawing such conclusion that rest upon salts
factoriy If honorable Senators from the South have
made up their minds for this bill without the
amendment whether it carries not think there is
very decisive reason which has been state yet by
any gentleman, why they should SO vote.