Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-02-11

of the legal controversy who were unwilling to abide the
decision of the courts the matters IN dispute.
Such being the character of the controversy In respec
the territory acquired from Mexico, similar question
has arisen in regard to the right TO hold slaves IN the pro-
posed Territory Of Nebraska when the Indian laws shall
be Withdrawn and the country thrown open TO emigra
ton and settlement by the eighth section OF An act to
authorize the people Of the Missouri Territory to form
constitution and State Government and for the admission
of such State into the Union on an equal footing with
the original States and to prohibit slavery in certain
Territories approved March 6, 1920 it was provided
that in all territory ceded by France to the United
States under the of Louisiana, which lies north OF
thiry-sx degrees and thirty minutes north latitude,
not included within the limits of the State contemplated
by this act slavery and involuntary servitude, other
wise than the punishment of crimes whereof the par
ties shall have been duly convicted, shall be and is
hereby forever prohibited" &c.
Under this section as in the case OF the Mexican law
in New Mexico and Utah. it is disputed point whether
slavery is prohibited in the Nebraska country by raid
enactment The decision Of this question involves the
constitutional power of Congress pass laws prescribing
and regulating the domestic institutions of the various
Territories of the Union In the opinion ofhose eminent
statesmen who hold that Congress is invested with
rghtfu authority to legsate upon the subject of slavery
in the Territories, the eighth section of the act pre-
paratory to the admission of Missouri is null and
void; while the prevailing sentiment in large por
ton of the Union susains the doctrine that the Con-
suton of the United States to every citizen
an unalienabe right to into any of the Terri
tories with his property of whatever kind and descrp
ton and to hold and enjoy the same under the sanction
of law
Your committee do feel emselces called upon TO enter
into The discussion of these controversial questions They
polre the grave hich produced tie agitation the
sectional strife, and the fearful struggle Of 1850. As Con-
GREss DEEMED 1T WISE AND PRUDENT TO REFRAIN FROM
DECIDING MATTER IN CONTROVERSY THEN, either by
affirming repeating the Mexican laws, by an act
decaratory of the intent of the Constitution ande
of the protection tito the slave property
in the Territories, so YOUR COMMITTEES ARE NOT PREPARED
NOW TO RECOMMEND DEPARTURE FROM THE CoURsE PuR-
ING OR REPEATING THE STH Missouri ACT
by any declaratory of the meaning of the Cons
tuition in respect to the legal points in dispute.
Your committee deem fortunate for the peace of the
country and the security Of the Union that the conro
versy then resulted in the adoption of the Compromise
measures which the two great political parties with sin
guar unanimty, have affirmed as cardinal article Of
their faith and proclaimed to the world final settle
ment of the controversy and end of the agitation
due respect therefore, for tie auosced opinions Of Senator's
as we as proper sense patriotic duty enjon upon your
the principles and literal adoption of the
enacments Of that adjustment in all their territorial
bills, so far as the same not locally inappcabe
FROM THE UNION OF JANUARY 10.
The NEBRASKA BILL AND THE CoMpRoMIsE.-Whst
the organs Of abotonism stufying themselves in
their effort to make IN issue between the Missouri
promise Of 1920 and the compromise Of 1S50both Of
which violently opposed by them during the peril
scenes Of lS5Owe gratifed to witness the
nestness and prompness with which Democratic
temporares rayng to the support of the principles
proposed to be Incorporated into the Nebraska BILL We
subion the views taken of this subject by those two
sterling organs Of Democracy the Boston Post and the
Philadelphia Argus. The Post says:
"On the 22d bill was introduced into the House to
organize the Territory of Nebraska This measure
up under interesting aspects BY the Missouri compro-
mise slavery to be prohibited in all territory north Of
36o 30 but it nothing about slavery south of that
line and hence States south of that line might establish
the people might determine. When the terri
tory which south of this line acquired from New
Mexico the clause known the Wilmot provso ut
tempted to be applied to it. Gen. Glass; in his Nicholson
letter. took the broad ground that the people Of every
State and every Territory have right determine their
constitution and laws and that the relation Of the Gene
raj towards both States and Territories should
be of complete non-nteryention to the slavery
question On the floor of the Senate he conended that
the Wilmot proyiso was unconstitutional This the
principle, Ne,o Mrico and Utah. that Mr. Webster
advocated. This prevailed and thus the compromise Of
1850 BECAME ADDED that Of the Missouri compromise Of
1920. Y The report is brief, clear, concise and
admirable, and we cannot too highly commend it to the
attention Of ALL"
The Argus comments as follows:
This report Of Judge Douglas will be hailed with de
light and satisfaction in all parts Of the Union evncng
as does the earnest intention to abide by the
mise act of 1850 final and unalterabe settlement
the slavery issue between the States The pubca-
ton of this report and BILL, coming they do endorsed
/ by Judge Douglas, who is known to be stanch and
trusted friend of the National Administration cannot but
exert prominent influence on the public mind" -
rRoMrHE UNION OF JANUARY 90.
THE Missouri CoMrRoMIsE-We have expressed
our cordial approval of the bill introduced by Mr..
Douglas, providing Territorial Government for Ne
braska 1t will be remembered that the BILL proposed
to be amended by Mr. Douglas, reenacs and applies to
Nebraska the clause slavery adopted in the compro
mise of 1850 That clause is silent the question
slavery during the Territorial condition of the inhab
tants but expressly recognises and asserts their right
the institution of slavery they may determine in their
constitution Two propositions have been made in the
senaeone by Senator Dixon, Whig and the other by
Senator Sumner Aboitonst-whch indicate that the
bill, proposed by Mr. Douglas is to be vigorously as
sailed Mr. DIXON proposes TO amend ii By clause en-
pressly repeating the act Of 1920 commonly hnocn as
Me Missouri compromise Mr. Sumner proposes to amend
by expressly declaring that the Missouri compromise is
to continue in force. y
We free to declare that should have been con-
tent to the question thus presented left where the
Compromise Of 1850 and the bill of Judge Douglas both
left it and yet it would be uncandd in us if we did not
add that clause in the Compromise of 1850 and in Mr.
Douglass Nebraska bill, declaring the act Of 1920 null
siona intervention wod hare made both these raea-
sures wiM opinions and uishes But
we accepted the acts of 1850 WERE PASSED and
approved their passage final compromise and in the
spirit we have been content with the perpetuaton
Of that Compromise proposed by Mr. Douglass Nebras
ka bill We have yielded to the Missouri Compro-