The Ohio star. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1830-1854, 1854-03-01

discussion. think, sir, thaC all tnS SHOWS pret'y
clearly that up to the very close of the last session
of Congress. nobody had ever thought of repeal
by supersedure. Then, what took place at the
commencement Of the present session! The
Senator from Iowa. early in December, introduced
a bill for the organization of the Territory OF Ne
braska, l believe it was the same bill which was
under discussion here at the last session, line for
| line, and word for word. If am wrong. the SEN
ator will correct
Did the Senator fro-> Iowa then entertain the
idea that the Missouri prohibition had been super
sedsd! No, sir neither ne any other man
here, SO far as could be judged from any discus
sion. or statement, or remark, had received this
notion.
Well, on the 4th day of January, the Commit
tee on territories, through their chairman, the
| Senator from Illinois, made a report on the ter
ritorial organization of Nebraska and that report
was accompanied by bill Now, sir, on the 4th
day of January, did the Territories entertain the
| opinion that the Compromise acts of 1850 super
seeded the Missouri prohibition! If they did they
were very careful to keep it to themselves We
will judge the committee by its own report
What does that sayl In the first place they des-
cribe the character of the controversy in respect
to the territories acquired from Mexico. They
say that some believed that the Mexican law pro-
hibiting slavery was in force there, while others
claimed that the Mexican law became imperative
at the moment of acquisition, and that shareholders
could take their slaves into the Territory, and
hold them there under the provisions of the Con
stitution. The Territorial Compromise acts, as
the committee tell Us, steered clear of those ques
tions. They simply provided that the States Of
ganized out of these Territories might come in
with without slavery, as they should elect, but
studiously avoided the question whether slaves
could or could not be introduced before the organ-
: zation of State Governments. That question was
left entirely to judicial decision.
Well. sir, what did the committee propose to
do with the Nebraska Territory? In respect to
that, as in respect to the Mexican Territory, diff
ference of opinions exist relation TO The intro
duetion of slaves. There the Southern gentlemen
,, who contend that notwithstanding the Missouri
f prohibition, they can take their slaves into the
Territory covered by it, and hold them there by
II virtue ofthe Constitution On the other hand the
. great majority of the American people, North and
O South, believe the Missouri prohibition conslita-
). tional and effectual. Now, what did the commit.
4 tee proposel Did they propose to repeal the pro-
il hbitou? Did they suggest that it had been super
h seded1 Did they advance any idea of that kind
No, sir. This is their language:
u "Under this section as in the case of the Mex
n ican law in New Mexico and Utah, it is disputed
point whether Slavery is prohibited in the Nebras
A la country by raiid enactment. The decision o
this question involves the constitutional power 0
!, Congresssto pass laws prescribing and regulatn;
the domestic institutions of The various Territorie
of the Union. La the opinion of those eminen
:, statesmen who hold that Congress is invested wit
/, rghtfu authority TO legisate upon the subjec
> of slavery n tho Territories, the eighth section
the act reparatory TO the admission of Missouri
null and void. while prevailing sentiment in
=. large portion of the Union susans the doctrin
that the constitution of the United States SECURE
to every citizen inalienable right to. move int
:, any of the Territories with his property, of what
ever kind and description, and TO hold and.sepin
:, the same under the sanction of law. N0Hf esn
mittee do not feel themselves called upon 10 ente
into the discussion of these controverted question
- They involve the same grave issues which pre-
: duced the agitation, the sectional strife, and tn
fearful struggle of 1885,"
=, This language will bear repetition
~
=. "Your committee do not feel themselves ca!le
upon to enter into the discussion of these coutr
~ verted questions. They involve the same gra,
issues which produced the agitation, the section
:. strife, and the fearful struggle of 1850"
=. Then they go on TO say:
mr. "Congress deemed it wise and prudent to r.
IN. frain from deciding the matters in controver
he then, either by affirming or repeating the Mexic,
Dp. laws by act decIaraory of the true intent
nal the Constitution and the extent of the protec ec
of afforded by tito slave property in the Terrtorie
ou SO your committee not prepared now to recor
nv mend departure from the course pursued on th
ion memorable OCCASION either by affirming or repei
ing the eighth section of the Missol
iest act, or by any declaratory of the meaning
of the Constitution in respect to the legal points
err dispute." Sd 'ssl9-
he Mr.. President, here very remarkable fac
se The Committee Territories declared that
no was not wise. that it prudent, that it "
not right, to the old CONTROVERSY and
fis- rouse agitation. They declared that they &or
as abstain from any recommendation of a repeal of
prohibition, or of any provision declaratory of
ext construction of the Constitution in respect to
mat legal points in dispute. z-5 l5-l q 8
ess, Mr.. President. I am NOT one Of those who @,
posed the question between Mexican law aud
the saveholding pretensions, avoided in the Vi
ink, and New Mexico act; do think that The int
hat duction into the Nebraska bill of the provisions
that those acts in respect TO Slavery would leave
our question between the Missouri prohibition and
King same slaveholding claim entirely unaffected.
, no of very different opinion. But am dealing n
ex- with the report of the committee. and show.
yet, yond all controversy that the Senator's own rep
new made only four short weeks ago, gave no count
een ance whatev TO the doctrine of repeal by sup
sedure. II ,.4-.H-... .--.ss--
her, Well, sir, the bill reported by the commit
tric was printed in the Washington Sentinel on Sat
the day, January z. 1t contained twenty sectio
-lanr Ir1aI or,e