The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-02-16

count gwen of it in the Senator's speech wouli
| lead one to suppose that it was an important
part oil the Louisiana acquisition. 1t is, IN fact
not of the smallest consequence There are no
| inhabitants there. 1t is. as | have said, Sc
| cluded little valley in the Rocky Mountains
visited once by Fremont and penetrated Occa
slonally by wandering bands of Arapahoes and
Utahs
The summit of the Rocky Mountains was as.
signed as the eastern limit of Utah That Limit
In consequence of the curvature Of the mountain
range, happened to include this valley Nobody
here, at the time of the passage of the Utah
bill, adTcrted to that fact 1t was known that
the Rocky Mountain range was very near the
arbitrary line fixed by the treaty, and nobody
ever dreamed that the adoption of that range
as tho eastern boundary Of Ut:h would abro-
gate tie Missouri pHDlubi-iorA TIE SesiSsa-
reported that boundary line Did he tell the
Senate or the country that it's establishment
would have that effect! No sir: never The
assertion OF the Senator that Il close cxami.
nation of the Utah act clearly establishes the
fact that it was the intent rs we'll ~ the legal
effect Of the Compromise Measures of 1850 a.
supcrsede the Missouri Compromise. ard aft
geographical and territorial lines il la.
short Of prcpostorous There was no intent
at all except TO make convenient eastern
boundary to Utah, and no legal effect at all
upon the louisiana acquisition, except to cut
Oft from it the little valley OF the Middle Park.
The second specification of the Senator de
MES the accuracy of the following statement cf
the address in relation to this pretense Of super
seizure
The Compromise acts, themselves, refute
this pretensOn. In the third article of the
second section Of the joint resolution for an
nexing Texas to the United States it is expressly
declared, that in such State or States as shall
be formed out Of said Territory north of said
Missouri Compromise line Slavery or inyolun
tary servitude, except for crime, shall DO pro
hibited and in the act for organizing New
Mexico, and settling the boundary Of Texas a
proWso was Incorporated, on the motion of MIR
Mason, OF Virginia, which distinctly preserves
this prohibition, and flOuts the bare-faced pre-
tension, that all territory Of the United States.
whether north or south Of the Missouri Com
promise line, Is to be open to Slavery. 1t is as
follows:
"'Prouided, That nothing herein contained
shall be construed to impair or qualify ANY
THING contained in the third article Of the
second section Of the joint resolutions for an
nexing Texas to the United States approved
March ], 1915, either as regards the number
Of States that may hereafter be formed out Of
the State of Texas, OR OTHERWISE
Here is proof beyond controversy, that the
principle Ct the Missouri act, prohibiting Sla-
very north of 80 deg. 80 min, far from being
abrogated by the Compromise acts, is expressly
affirmed and that the proposed repeal Of this
prohibition, instead Of being an affirmation OF
the Compromise acts, is a repeal of a very I'M
portant provision Of the most important act Of
the series. 1t is sOlcmnly declared in the very
Compromise acts, that 5othing herein CONTAINED
shall be construed 10 lmpuiT or gHdifv' the pro-
hibitiOn of Slavery north Of 36 dec. 30 min,
and yet, in the face OF this declaration that
sacred prohibition is said To be OyerthroWn.
Can presumption further go To all who. in
a"y Wy, lean Iron theeS Comm n.ises we
about the passages | have Just read from the
address
They suppress the following material facts,
which If produced would have dispr0ved their
statement: They first suppress the fact that
tho same section OF the act cuts OF from Texas,
and codes TO the United States, all that part Of
Texas which lies north OF 80 deg. 30 min.
They then suppress the further fact that In,
same section of the law cuts of from Texas 81
large tract of country Oh tho west, more than
three degrees Of longitude, and added it to the
territory of the United States They then
suppress the further fact that this territory
thus cut off from Texas, ard to which the Mis-
souri, Compromise line did apply was iucorpa-
rated into the Territory Of New Mexico And
then what was done IL was Incorporated
into that Territory with this clause:
That when admitted as a State, the SAID
Territory or any portion Of the came. shall be
received into the Union with o. without Sla-
very, as their Constitution may prescribe at the
time OF its adoption
"Ycs, sir, the very bill AMI section from
which they quote cuts OFF al that part Of Tex
which WAS to be free by the Missouri Com
promise, together with some ON the south side
of tho line, incorporates il into the Territory ct
New Mexico, and then says that that Territory,
and every portion OF the same, shall come into
the Union with or without Slavery, ~ it sees
proper
The assertion here il. that all tho territory
claimed by Texas north Of SO deg 80 min. was
cut Oft by the Texan boundary and New Mex
leo act.
Mr.. DOUGLAS. Read it,
Mr.. CHASE. have read it, bat will read
it again.
Yes, sir, the very bill and section from
which they quote cuts Off al that part of Tex
as which was to be free by the Missouri Com.
promise, together with somc on the south side
of the line, Incorporates it with the Territory
Of New Mexico and then says that that Terri
tory, and every portion OF tho same, shall come
into the Union with or without Slavery, rs 1t
secs proper"
Mr.. DOUGLAS, lin his seat Most of it.
Mr.. CHASE. In his speech the Senator
said ALL the Territory claimed by Texas north
of 80 deg. 30 min. was incorporated into New
Mexico Now he says, MOST or IT. These are
very different statements | will show the
Senate what was aud what was not inc0rpn.
rated The boundary line between Spain and
the United States-fOr want to make this
matter perfectly clear and dstinct-was this
The boundary line between the two conn
tries west of the Mississippi shall begin on the
Gulf OF Mexico, at the mouth of the river IA
bine, in the sea, continuing north along the
western bank OF that river to the 32,l deg Of
latitude thence by line due north to the de-
gree Of latitude where it strikes the Rio Rcxo
of Natchtoches or Red river: then Following
the course of the Rio ROxO westward. to the
degree of longitude 100 deg. west from Lon.
don, and % deg from Washin gton then cross.
ing the said Red river, and running thence by
a hno due north to the river Arkausa thence
following the course Of the southern bank 81
the Arkansas to It's source in latitude ~ deg.
north, aud thence by that parallel Of latitude
to the South Sea-
Now look ut this boundary upon The map.
Here it is. Exhibiting tho mspl Here we
go up the Sabine to the 32d deg. parallel then
straight north to the Red river; then along
the Red river TO the Doth deg. oflongitude then
straight north again to the Arkansas; then up
the Arkansas to it's source then straight north
once more to the l2d deg OF LATITUDE There
You see the boundary between the United States
and the Spanish possessions, as deii1ed by the
treaty of 1920.
Now, what did Texas claim? Hero is the
most authentic evidence Of it in her own aet
approved December 10, 1886, by Sam Houston.
| will read it:
IL a. IL.