The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-02-09

and was laid upon tne Eapie In the SenSSe, io
want of time to act upon it, was not this won
derful discovery, of the annulment of the Mis-
sousi Compromise announced How happen
IL when Mr.. Atchison declared in his speect
mon the bill in the Senate that the Missouri
Compromise was in force, that it was useless
TO think that it could ever be repealed, ant
that the Territory of Nebraska would conse
ouently be free from Slavery-that Dlr. Doug
lbs did not correct him, by informing him thai
the Compromise had been superseded BY the
principles of the legislation Of 1880? Why
when Mr. Douglas introduced his first BILL or
the 4th of January, did he not make thi:
announcement in his Reports Why on the
contrary, did he assume that the Territory Of
Nebraska sustained relations to Slavery, like
those sustained in 1S4S by New Mexico aud
Utah that as there was division of opinion
then. as to whether the Mexican Laws prohib
ting Slavery were in force, 80 there was divi.
sion Of opinion now, whether the Missouri
Compromise, prohibiting Slavery, was valid;
and that, as Congress then avoided any ex-
preston of opinion on the validity of the Mex
lean Laws, so it ought now to avoid any ex-
preston of opinion on the validity of the Mis-
souri, Compromise, leaving that question, as it
had left the former, subject alone to judicial
decision Nineteen days after the presenta-
ton of these.views, Mr.. Douglas introduces
a new BILL proposing that Congress declare
that by the principles of the legislation of $780,
the Missouri Compromise was invalidated, and
is therefore imperative! Did he believe his
Report when he wrote it? Then he did not
believe what he now would persuade Congress
to declare. Does he believe what he would
persuade Congress now to declare? Then he
never believed what he states in his Report or
he has fundamentally changed his views in
the short space of nineteen days.
But let US examine the terms of this propo-
sition in the 14sh section of the new bill,
which Congress is asked to sustain. The Mis-
souri, Compromise act, it is averred, was su-
perseded by the principles of the legislation of
1850" 1t is not pretended that it was super
seded in express terms or by formal enact
ment. What were these principles? Con-
gross established Territorial Governments for
New Mexico and Utah. emitting any restriction
in relation to Siarery, and inserting in each of
the acts establishing them, the following pro-
vision:
ssThat when admitted as a State the said
Territory, or any portion Of the same, shall be
received into the Union with or without Sla-
very, as their Constitutions may prescribe ct the
time of admission"
The principles" SO vaguely referred to by
Mr.. Douglas resolve themselves into single
Principle, or rule of action, which is the mean
ing of the term, as here employed. 1t is, that
States formed out Of Territory should be re-
eeived into the Union aCith or aeithom Slarery,
as their Constitutions might prescribe.
This Principle could not and did not supersede
the Proviso of the Missouri act because it was
not in conflict with, or repugnant to, it. They
refer to different subjects-one, to Territory, in
a territorial condition, the other, to territory,
in the act of becoming State, under authority
of Congress. The Prouiso prohibits Slavery
forever IN TERRITORY; the Principle is not
that Slavery may exist an Territory, but that
Territory, becoming a State, shall be received
into the Union, whether it tolerate or reject it.
One act might embody both the Proviso and
the Principle, without any direct contradiction
Again: This Principle was confned in ex-
press terms to the Territories of New Mexico
and Utah 1t was not enunciated as a general
rule of action. The language of the provision
is upmistakable on this point-"that when
admitted as a State the said Territory, or any
portion of the same"-that il, Utah, or New
Mexico, or any portion of either. Whereas
the Provso of the Missouri Act embraced, in
express terms, all that portion of Louisiana
Territory, exclusive Of the State of Missouri,
lying above SO deg. 80 min. 1t is a sheer alb
surdity to say that Principle or rule of action,
confined in express terms to the former Terri
tories, superseded or could supersede Proviso
| adopted in express terms for the last-named
Territory.
The omission of any restriction as to Slavery,
| in the acts providing Territorial Governments
for New Mexico and Utah, may be pointed to
as establishing Principle. 1t established no
rule Of action for the future, of course, no Prin
ciple. 1t was simply an expedient adopted in
peculiar circumstances, for peculiar reasons,
which might never exist again. The non-ex-
ercise of power in a single case does not imply
its non. existence, or involve pledge of its non
exercise in other cases. Congress prohibited
Slavery in the Northwest Territory in 1887 it
did not prohibit it in the Missouri Territory in
1912; it did prohibit it in Louisiana Territory
north of SO deg 80 min. in 1920, in Texas,
north of the same line, in 1S45, in Oregon in
lS4S and in 1850, it did not prohibit it in
New Mexico and Utah. It's several acts in re-
laton to these Territories, imposing restrictions
or emitting restrictions, do not conflict with
one another, nor was it ever before suggested
that they successfully superseded each other.
Look at the ridiculous length to which the ar
gument Of Mr.. Douglas on this point would
Iced Congress having omitted to impose any
restrictions as to Slavery, in the acts providing
Territorial Governments for New Mexico and
Utah in 1850, therefore, tho restriction as to
Slavery in the act for the admission of Mis-
souri, into the Union in 1920, was superseded :
and therefore, similar restrictions in the Oregon
Territorial Government of 184s and the Texas
Annexation resolutions of lS45, were also su-
persedsd! And again, Congress having omitted
to inserpose any restriction as to Slavery, in
the acts establishing Territorial Governments
for Missouri in 1912, and Mississippi in 1898,
therefore, the former restriction in the Ordi-
nance of 1877, for the Government Of the
Northwest Territory, was also superseded!
Why waste any more words upon such a
1 ID