Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1854-03-16

said State TO the fundamental condition, and |
transmit to the President Of the United
States, on or before the fourth Monday in |
November next, an authentic copy of the !
said act; upon the receipt whereof the |
President by proclamation, shall announce |
the fact; whereupon, and without any fur
ther proceeding on the part of Congress. the !
admission of the said State in into this Union |
shall be considered as complete.
JOHN w. TAYLOR.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
JOHN GALLARD,
Speaker of the Senate, pro .empore.
Approved March ., 1921.
JAMES MONROE.
This proposition, when submitted to the
people Of Missouri, and acceded to by them
as it was, may very properly be called
compact" For there were parties to it
the general government on one side, and the
people Of Missouri on the other-both agree
ing to it. But not so with the eighth secc-
tion of the act here referred to. There
were no such parties TO it; that was nothing
but law. with no greater sanction than any
other statute that may give place to sub
sequent legislation. There was no compact
about it. Missouri never gave her sane
tion to it. She could have been any party
to it. She had no right to the territory out
side here limits. She had no power or au-
thority to make any compact concerning it.
But the gentleman argued as if he consil-
cred this eighth section Of the act Of 1920.
fixing the line Of SO deg 30 min, north
of which slavery should be forever excluded,
and which is commonly called the Missouri
| Compromise line" as contract between the
north and the south, as the parties. How,
then, stand the facts upon this point of view?
| How did this eighth section get into the bill
of 1902 1t was in this way; the north in
sisted upon a restriction against the adms-
sion of Missouri as State, which required
her TO abolish slavery within her limits, as a
condition prccededent TO her admission: the
House passed q bill with such restriction, to
which the south were in mass opposed. In
the Senate, on motion by Mr.. Thomas Of IL
inois that clause containing a restriction on
the State was stricken out, and this eighth
section inserted in lieu of it. The south in
mass We're opposed to the State restriction,
as have said; but many of her'members-
a majority of two, believe, voted for the
substitute as the lesser evil Of the two. In
this way the substitute was carried as an
amendment TO the bill. This amendment
was agreed to in the House by vote of 1874
to ~. Among the 40 noes are 10 be found
the names of several the most prominent men
of the south. In this way this line of sc
deg 80 min, was incorporated in the bill Of
1920 preparatory to the admission of Mis-.
souri, as a State. And to this extent and tc
no other, can it be called compromise, {
contract or compact. 1t was literally fol Gee
upon the south as disagreeabe alternative
by superior numbers, and in this way wen
upon our statue-book as any other lau
passed by majority of votes. So much
then, sir, for this compact" or contract
Now let us see, in the second place, how i
has been fulfilled or adhered to from that da,
= to this.
p The gentleman says ii has been acquiesce
! in and confirmed to for thirty years, and h
= asks with much solemnity, if we are nov
e about to abrogate and violate it. l hav
:, shown, sir, that the South, was in no sens
a party to this congressional restriction mort
. of SO deg. 80 min., except as a vanquishe
- party, being out-voted on the direct questio
and protesting against it with all her migl
d and power. Yet, sir, notwithstanding tn
.e a large majority other people from that da
to this, as think may safely affirm, ha,
p held that clause of the Missouri act to
oc unconstitutional, as it was based upon Il
n principle Of division of the common teri
- tory between the free States and the sla
:, States of the Union. For the sake of pea
:, and harmony, the south did patriotical
l. yield and was willing for all time to cor
to to abide by it. say oras because of u
N missouri compromise" and the principl
II upon which it was founded it may now
i. said; illinois fruit"
The issue make with the gentleman up
Of this branch Of his speech is, that this ngrt
Ii. ment or contract, as he argued it, betwe
the north and the south, as 10 the line of
'p- vision between slave territory, and free t,
q" ritory, has not remained undisturbed and
" " violate for thirty years, as he afiirms. Itl
Al. been shainelessly disregarded by Congr,
lat repeatedly, and in principle was entirely
on perceeded, as shall show by the princip
10 10 established by your legislation in 1850,
;~o ' But inasmuch as the arrangement was
,all iginally obnoxious TO the south, the char
my orviOlation oft cannot justly be made agai
ion her. No, SIR it was the north that refu