The daily union., 1854-02-26
CONGRESSIONAL.
SPEECH OF HON. A. II. STEPHENS.
on GEORGIA

or GEORGIA.;
Delivered Ia the House OF Representatives, February II
1854.
The House being in the Committee Of the Whole on
Mr. STEPHENS, OF Georgia, said
l was very anxious day before yesterday, Mr.. Chair
AMI and the gentleman from New York, upon my lei,
Sr FESToS,l addressed the House upon the subject o
lhe Nebisska bill, make remarks upon the
subject in reply TO them desired TO do al the lime
have lost some OF the ador OF feeling which the occa
sion then excited yet think tmportant that these posi-
tons should be answered and is tor that purpose thai
rise 10 address the committee to-day. assure you
shall be as brief as possible.
The gentleman from Vermont. [Mr. MEAcHAM.] 4
understood the train Of his Argument, opposed ihe Ne
baska BILL as presented to the House, mainly upon The
ground that il declares the eighth section of the acI oi
1920 preparatory to The admission of Missouri into the
Union State imperative, because 1t is inconsistent
with the principles OF The acs Of 1850. known a. the
compromise Of that year This eighth section OF - acl
OF 1920 that clause which. without any relation to the
State OF Missouri. prohibits slavery forever from all that
part OF the territory acquired by The Louisiana
outside Of Missouri north OF 30 deg 80 min north ali-
tude The Argument OF the gentleman consisted OF The
following series OF assumptions:
/ FIRST That that restriction or prohibition was in the
nature of compact, or contract, as he called it,
| Secondly. That it had been continuously adhered 10
! from that time TO this
| Thirdly, That the measure now proposed would be a
violation OF that compact.
Fourihy That this breach OF good faith would be at
This, sir, was the outline of his argument Now.
propose 10 take up these positions and show TO the
House, if not 10 The gentleman himself, that in every
particle they are unenable.
In The first place, state that that eighth clause OF the
act preparatory 10 the admission OF Missouri ino the
Union restricting slavery north OF 36 deg. 80 min
compact. 1t never had any Of the requisites or
characteristics Of compact compact between whom
Between The North and South
Mr. MEACHAM | used the word contract" not
Compact"
M STEPHENS The gentleman from Vermont used
the word contract as said, but others have used the
mean about the same thing. But what was abont to
affirm is, that that "grea Missouri Compromise" which
Mr. Clay proposed. and with which his fame is identified
had nothing do with this restrictive clause OF the
of 1890 Tha, compromise Mr.. Clay'sl in the na-
ture OF !" compact" Ii /" compact between the
general government and the Stale OF Missouri am
aware that the general opinion on this subject is very
erroneous This Mr.. Clay fully explained in 1850 The
common idea is, that Mr.. Clay the author of the
prohibition OF slavery north OF 36 deg 80 min But such
is the fact He did not even vote for it. That prop
osilion came from gentleman from Illinois The CON-
promise that Mr. Clay offered afterwards It's history
is this: The people OF Missouri, under The act of 9th
March, 1890, went or and formed State constitution
which contained clause authorizing the Legislature to
pass law to prevent the immigration OF free negroes
and when application was made Tor admission as State
into the Union Congress refused the admission unless
that clause should be expunged. ltwas then that Mr.
Clay brought forward his measure Here il is
Resolution providing for the admission Of Missouri into the
| Union on q certain condition
Resolvsd By the Senate and House Of Reprasntatpe, oj
the Uausd Of Amsrtca Congress assembled Tha,
ssour sha be admitted into the Union equal foot
the codrion that the ionrlh oiaue of The
twenty section Of the third article Of the constitution
submltied on The par. q he SAID sas % Congress sinai
that law shall be passed IN conformity thereto, by which
citizen OF either of the States this Union shall be
cluded from the enjoyment OF any of the privileges and i'm
unites which such citizen Is enttled under the
Of the United SAFE. Provdsd That the re
he Stse Il
OF the said State the said fundamental condition.
and raasmit 10 The President oIbe United safes on or be.
lore the fourth Monday in November next an authentic
copy OF the said act upon the receipt whereof the Pes-
without any farther proceeding the part OF Con.
gfess OF the said State into Union sd all
| be considered as complete.
Speaker Of the HG9ss 9ma q 4 Gesp,re;senS'sves
/ Approved March q 1921.
! This proposition when submitted TO the people OF
Missouri and acceded to BY them as il was NAV yery
propery be called compact" For there were part lei
1.-THE general government on one sde and the people
OF Missouri on the otherbolh agreeing 10 it, But not
40 with the eighth section OF the act referred to- There
were no such parties TO il that nothing but law,
with greater sanction than any other statute that may
give place to subsequent legislation. There was
pact about H. Missouri gave her sanction it,
She could no, have been any party it, She had no
right TO The territory outside her limits. She had pow
er OF authority to make any compact concerning il.
| But the gentleman argued as II he considered this
hlh section OF the act OF $780, fixing the line OF SO
deg 80 mn north OF which slavery should be forever
excluded, and which is commonly called the Missouri
COMPROMISE lne" as contract between the North and
Souih as the parties. How then, stand the facts upon
this point OF view How did this eIeh hh section get into
the b Of 1870 II was in this way the North insist
ed upon a restriction against the admission OF Missouri
as State, which required her abolish slavery within
her limits, condition precedent TO her admission ;
the House passed bill with such restriction, TO which
The South were in mass opposed. In the Senate,
on motion by Mr.. Thomas, of Illinois, that clause
containing a restriction the State stricken
out, and this eighth section inserted IN lieu OF
IT, The South IN mass were opposed 10 the State
restriction, as have said but many OF her members
the lesser evil OF the two. In this way the substitute
was carried amendment TO the bill. This amend
ment agreed TO in the House by vote OF 81 to "a
Among these az noes TO be found the Of
era OF the most prominent men OF the South In this
way this line oi 80 deg 80 min. Incorporated in the
bill of ls2o preparatory 10 the admission OF Missouri as
State and TO this extent, and other, IL be call
ed a compromise, contract, or compact II was lit
orally forced upon the South as adsagreeabe alerna.
tive by superior numbers and in this way went upon
our statute book any other lao pesscd by majority
OF SO muoh ihen sir, for this "compacf'
tract Now, lei US see IN The second place. how il has
been fulfilled OF adhered TO from that day TO This
The gentleman says IL has been acquieseed In and
coniormed to Tor thirty yesrs and he asks, with much
solemnily II we about 10 violate and abrogaie
Iit2 have shown, sir, that the South
party this congressional restriction Forth OF 80 deg
80 min except as vauquIshed pariv being oui-voed on
the direct question: and protesting against II with all her
might and power. Yet, sir, notwithstanding tins, and
Notwithstanding large majority of ber people from that
day to this, think may safely Affirm, have held that
clause OF the Missouri act to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL it
based upon the principle of a division OF the