Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-02-06


"The Consultation and all laws OF the Uni
ted States which nre not locally inapplicable,
shall have the same force and effect within the
said Territory OF Nebraska ar elsewhere with
In the United States except the eighth section
OF the act preparatory to the admission OF Mis-
souri, into the Union, approved March 8, 1920,
schic4 Sus superseded By The principles of The
legislation Of 1850, COMMONLY called The Conn
promise Measures and as THEREFORE, declared
in0peratiUev
Doubtless, Mr. President, this provision one
rates as a repeal Of the prohibition. The Sem
ator from Kentucky was right when he said it
was In effect tho equivalent Of his amendment
Those who are willing to break and DESTROY the
old compact Of 1920, can vote for this bill with
full assurance that such will be it's effect. But
appeal to them not to vote for this supersednre
clause. ask them not to incorporate into the
legislation of the country declaration which
every one knows to DO wholly untrue. have
said that this doctrine Of supersedurc is new.
! have now proved that it is plant Of but ten
days growth IL was never seen or heard Of
until the 2sd day Of January 1854. II was
upon that day that this tree Of Upas was
planted: we already see it's poison fruits
The provision | have quoted abrogatcs the
Missouri prohibition. II asserts no right in the
Territorial Legislature to prohibit Slavery The
Senator from Illinois, in his speech, was very
careful to assert no right Of legislation in
Territorial Legislature, except subject to the
restrictions and limitations Of tho Constitution.
We know well enough what the understanding
or claim Of Southern gentlemen il in respect to
these limitations and restrictions They insist
that by them every Territorial Legislature is
absolutely precluded from all power Of lcgisla-
ton for the prohibition Of Slavery. warn
gentlemen who propose to support this bill, that
their votes for this provision will be regarded
as admitting this claim.
have thus given brief account Of the mu.
tations which this bill has undergone. | have
shown the origin and duration Of the pretence
that the Missouri prohibition is superseded BY
the legislation of 1850. | now appeal to the
Senators who sit around me, and who with me
participated in the discussions Of 1861 ask
them to say whether any one Of them imagin-
ed then, or believes now, that the Missouri
prohibition was superseded by the legislation Of
that year. Here sir, sits the Senator from
Virginia, Mr. Mason will he say that at any
time before the 23d Of January, 1884 lie ever
heard such proposition stated or maintained
anywhere, by anybody? No. sir, he will not
say IT, There is no evidence that the assertion
was ever made before that day, when it made
its appearance in the Senator's bill II is re-
markable circumstance, that 5000 copies Of
the committees report have been printed by
the order of the Senate, and know not how
many for individual subscribers, and circulated
through the country, and sustaining the bill
upon the ground that the Missouri prohibition
il neither repealed nor afirmed-while the bill
itself as now amended expressly abrogates that
prohibition. The report as circulated condemns
the bill as amended, and the bill as amended
contradicts the report as circulated All this
must necessarily mislead and confuse the pub
lie Judgment.
have now proved that the doctrine Of su-
persedure is novelty. | will proceed to prove
that it is as groundless rs it is novel,
The Senator from Illinois, in his speech the
other day, made general charge Of gross ig-
norance Of the history and geography of the
country against the signers Of the Independent
Democratic Appeal and singled out several
paragraphs of that document for special repre-
hension. II was rather adroit in the Senator
tack upon two Senators whose opinions on Sla-
very questions are at variance with those most
commonly received here. But the movement
will not think, avail him much. i have no
fears that he can refnte any statement, or over
turn any proposition, Of that address. Sir, he
might as well attack Gibraltar. True in all
its statements, and irrefragable, as believe,
in all its rcasonings, it is impregnable to any
assault by him, or any man.
The first specification under his general
charge Of ignorance and misrepresentation de-
mics the truth Of o statement which will now
read:
These acts were never supposed to abro-
gate or touch tho existing exclusion of Slavery
from what is now called Nebraska. They APP
piled to the Territory acquired from Mexico,
and to that only. They were intended as
settlement Of the controversy growing out Of
that acquisition, and Of that controversy only.
They must stand or fall by their own merite.o
That the fret sentence which have read
is absolutely true, suppose no man now doubts
Senators who were here during the discussions
Of 1880 must remember that the Report &c the
Committee Of Thirteen distinctly stated that
the Compromise Measures applied TO the 1new-
ly acquired Territory The honorable and
distinguished Senator from Michigan sils near
me, and can say whether any syllable was ut
tered in the Committee Of Thirteen or else
where, to his knowledge, which indicated any
purpose to apply them TO any other Territory.
IL am in error ] beg the Senator 10 correct
me. Mr.. Cass remained silent am right,
then.
But the Senator from Illinois says that the
Territorial Compromise Acts did in fact apply
10 other territory than that acquired from
Mexico. How does no prove thati He says
that a part Of the territory was acquired from
Texas But this very territory which he says
was acquired from Texas was acquired first
from Mexico. After Mexico cedod il 10 the Uni
tod States Texas claimedin that the ccssicn
Injured to her benefit. That claim was rcln-
quished TO tho United States. The case, then,
stands thus we acquired the territory from
Mexico; Texas claimed II, but gave mp her
claim. This certainly docs not disprove tho
assertion of the Appeal, that the territory was
acquired from Mexico and as certainly u does
not sustain the Senator's assertion that II was
acquired from Texas.
The Senator next tells tho Senate and the
country, that by the Utah act there was incu-