Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1854-02-16

The principle IN order that IL might be ap-
piled to all future acquisitions, and evcntu-
ally be extended 70 tie Pacific ocean,
Hence it will be found that in the resolutions
for the annexation of Texas, the line OF
36 deg, 80, by the name of the Missouri
Compromise line was extended westward
through the State of Texas to the Rio
Grande, and the provision made that slave
ry should be prohibited mouth and permitted
south of it.
When we acquired New Mexico and
California by the treaty of peace with Mex
leo, all the reasons which induced the origi-
nal establishment of the Missouri Compro-
mise line, applied with equal force for its
extension to the Pacific; and a just regard
for the principles of the Missouri Compro-
mise, for all the objects and considerations
which induced lis enactment in 1880 and
its extension through Texas in 1915, ap-
piled to its still further extension to the Pa
oic Ocean. If the Missouri Compromise
had thus been applied, if its principles had
justly been observed, the slavery question
would have been settled forever, so far as
the territories of the United States were
concerned.
1t will be borne in mind that in August,
l848, only few months after the treaty of
peace was made between Mexico and the
United States, and after we had acquired
New Mexico and California, the Senate of
the United States, on my own motion, pass
ed bill containing provision to extend
the Missouri Compromise line 10 the Pa
cfic, which bill was defeated in the House
of Representatives The defeat of that
bill was the first time that the principles of
the Missouri Compromise We're ever re-
jected by the government Of the United
States. 1t was the abandonment of the Mis-
souri, Compromise line as applicable to the
new territory, that created the necessity fer
the Compromise measures of 1850. Now,
sir, when gentlemen arraign me for a viola
tion of the compact by not adhering to the
principles Of the Missouri Compromise,
propose to stop and enquire who it was that
was faithful to its principles, and who it was
that violated and abandoned them.
The history of the question shows that
it was on my motion that the Missouri Com
promise line was extended through Texas,
and its principles observed there, and that
it was on my motion that the Senate asspd
the bill of 1913 for its extension to the Pa
ciiic Ocean, carrying its principles into ef-
feet in the territory then acquired. The re-
cord will show, also, that it was the Aboli-
tion and Freesoil party of this country, with
their allies, who defeated the extension of
the Missouri Compromise line TO the Pa
cific. The same men who now denounce
the Nebraska and Kansas bill, as reported
by the Committee on Territories. are the
men who denounced the Missouri Compro.
mise in 1920, who denounced its extension
through Texas in 1915, who denounced its
extension through New Mexico and Cali.
fornin in lS4S, and they are the same mer
who opposed the Compromise measures ot
1850. The Committee on Territories ant
those who act with them in the support o
this bill now, adhered in good faith to thc
Missouri Compromise and its principles
and only consented 10 abandon it after they
had been driven from it py it being defeated
in Congress by the aid of the Freesoil Abo
lition party and their allies. The men
5 therefore, who now claim to be the cspecia
, champions of the Missouri Compromis
were those who abandoned it and caused it
E defeat; the men who insist on it so siren
-, uously now, were the men who repudiate,
r its principles, and caused them to be aban
e doned.
have already said that the defeat an
abandonment of the principles of the Mis-
souri, Compromise, in lS4S, produced III
e necessity which resulted in the establish
: ment of the Compromise of 1850; which
in effect, substituted a great fundamenti
i principle Of self government for geograpll
i ical line. The leading feature in the legis
# laton in 1850 was, that Congress shoul
j not interfere with the domestic institution
n of the Territories, either by establishing @
9 prohibiting slavery, but should leave tn
people to do as they pleased upon that a
n well as all other questions affecting thei
}. own interests, and theirs alone. The es
tablishment of this principle, which is uni
versal in its application, applies as well t
old territories as new-not only to thos
!; which we then owned, but to those whic
r we might acquire for all time to come.
y was supposed that we had adopted rule {
e action which would furnish, not only ade
: quate remedies for existing evils but pre-
: vent similar agitations in all future time
: Those measures were not intended as mel
l. taronorory avnadiapts hut ,vnra ,Ias;opo q