Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-02-12

tne yeas. thirty were slave anu ninety
six from free States; of the nays, thirty-seven
were from slave states and FIVE from free
Among those who voted with the majority was
Mr.. Lowndes, Of South Carolina. whose vote,
estimated by the worth and honor of the man,
outweighs many opposites.
Now, for the first time, was geographical
line established between slavery and freedom IN
/ this country.
i Let us pause, and ascertain upon what prin-
i ciple this compromise adopted, and to
4 what territory it applied. The controversy was
between the two great sections OF the Union.
a The subject was q vast extent OF almost unoc-z
cupied country, embracing the whole territory
i west Of the Mississippi. 1T was territory in
4 which slave law existed at the time of acqui-
sition. The compromise section contained no
provision allowing slavery south of $50 30<.
IL could never have received the saction of Con-
/ gress if it had The continuance of slavery
I there was left to the determination Of crcum-
stances. There was probably an implied un-
Outstanding that Congress should not interfere
! with the operation of those circumstances, and
that was all. The prohibition north Of $50 3O<
was absolute and perpetual. The act in which
it was contained was submitted by the Presi-
dent to his cabinet, for their opinion upon the
constitutionality Of that prohibition. Calhoun,
Crawford, and Writ were members of that
II
its constitutionality, and the act received the
sanction Of the President. Thus we see that
the parties to the arrangement were the two
sections of the. country-the free States on one
Il side, the slave States on the other The sub
ject of it was the whole territory west OF the
Mississippi, outside of the State of Louisiana;
and the practical operation Of it was the d.
vision Of this territory betwee,s tic institution
of slavery and the institution OF freedom.
4 The arrangement was proposed By the slave
States. 1t was carried by their votes. A large
majority of southern senators voted forit A ma
jority Of southern representatives voted for 1t.
1t was approved by all the southern members
of the cabinet and received the sanction of
southern President. The compact was embod-
i led in a single bill containing reciprocal provi-
sions. The admission of Missouri with slavery
1 and the understanding that slavery should not
| be prohibited by Congress south of 360 30/ were
the considerations of the perpetual prohibition
north of that line and that prohibition was the
I consideration Of the admission and the under
! standing. The slave States received large
share of the consideration coming to them paid
4 in hand. Missouri was admitted without re-
striction by the act itself Every other part Of
the compact, on the part of the free States, has
been fulfilled to the letter. No part of the
4 compact on the part of the slave States has
been fulfilled at all, except in the admission OF
Iowa and the organization Of Minnesota; and
now the slave States propose to break up the
Il contract without the consent and against the
will fthe free States and upon doctrine of
supersedure which, if sanctioned at all, must be
inevitably extended so as to overthrow the ex-
listing prohibition Of slavery in all the organized
4 Territories.
\ Let me read to the Senate some paragraphs
from Niles's Register, published in Baltimore,
March IL, 1870, which show clearly what was
then the universal understanding in respect to
this arrangement:
"The territory north of 800 go is forepsr forbid
den to be peopled with slaves, except in the State
! Of Missouri. The right then, 10 nhibit slavery
in any of The territories is clearly and completely
mex nowiedged, and il il conditioned as 10 some or
them that. even when they become States. slavery
shall he forersr' prohibited in them. There is no
i hardship in this. The territories belong 10 the
! United States and the government may righifuly
prescribe the terms which il will dispose of the
i public lands. This great point agreed to in
\ the Senate. 33 votes TO IL: and in the House of
i Representatives by l34 TO AZ, or really 80 TO 81.
spect 10 the countries now subject 10 the legisla-
4 ton Of the general government
III ask senators particularly to mark this:
aHi is trHs The compromise is supported oniy BIZ
the Lfie, Of The aae ytpe0io5e By to authority acieh
1s.aeted III brt the eirenmsaHces Of ae case gro to
this tiIv a ruRcK equal thai of posifsps
pyotisfo,, of tho Constitation and ,ce do nofhazard
anything By saying that me Constitution erists it
j ITS observance. Both parties have sacrificed much
10 cancellation He iaish see Tie COMPACT Kept III
i good foith, and trust that kind Providence
| viii open the way 10 relieve Us Of an evil which
4 every good citizen deprecates the supreme
curse OF the country"
That, sir, was the language Of Marylander,
in 1920 He expressed the universal under
4 rxf he H. AL
! compact, complete. perfect irrepealablc, so far
as any compact embodied in legislative act can
be said to be irrepealable. 1t had the two Sec
tons OF the country for its parties, great ter
ritory for its subject and a permanent adjust
ment OF dangerous controversy for its object.
1t was forced upon the free States. 1t has been
literally fulfilled by the free States 1t is bind
ing, indeed, only upon honor and conscience
but, in such matter, the obligations of honor
and conscience must be regarded as even more
sacred than those of constitutional provisions.
Mr.. President, if there was any principle
which prevailed in this arrangement, it was
that OF permitting the continuance of slavery
in the localities where it actually existed at the
time of the acquisition of the territory, and
n prohibiting it in the parts Of territory in which
no slaves were actually held. This was a wide
II departure from the original policy which con-
n templated the exclusion Of slavery from Terri
tories in which it actually existed at the time
ofacquisition. But the idea that slavery could
ever be introduced into free territory under the
sanction of Congress, had not as yet entered
into any mans head
Mr.. President, shall hasten to conclusion.
In lS4s we acquired veal territory from Next
! co. The free States demnn5ed that this terri
4 tory free when acquired, shog'd remain free
under the government of the United States
The senator from Illinois tells us that he pro-
posed the extension OF the Missouri compromise
line through this territory, and he complains
that it was rejected by the votes of the free
States. So it was. And why? Because the
Missouri compromise applied to territory in
/ which slavery was already allowed. The Mis-
souri, prohibition exempted portion Of this
territory, and the larger portion, from the evil.
1t carried out in respect to that, the original
policy Of the country. But the extension Of