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

MIR. Day may console himself with the reHee-
ton that, in the estimation of ell unprecedented
men who know them both, he is, in all the at
tributes of manhood and gentlemanhood, 80
far the superior of Mr.. Stokes, that his motion
may we'll be set down as q mere ebullition of
envy.
THE OLD REPORT AND THE NEW BILL.
The Report of the Territorial Committee of
the SenasA which accompanied the original
Nebraska Bill, was strongly endorsed by the
Southern Administration Press, as sound in
principle, cogent in argument, and profound in
wisdom. In the curious and wonderful muta-
tions the Bill has undergone, that Report has
been lost sight of, and its positions have been
forgotten. We propose now to bring them
again to view, for document 30 remarkable
for it's logic and orthodoxy ought not to be
neglected
Alter speaking of the arrest of all unpleas-
ant controversies about Slavery by the Compro-
mise Measures of 1850, and other beneficial
effects resulting from them, as general reasons
why the Bill to form Nebraska Territorial
Government should be modelled after those for
the organization of Utah and New Mexico, it
proceeds to state the main argument for giving
the Bill this particular form. We bespeak for
it the critical attention of every reader
elf any other considerations were necessary
to render the propriety of this course impera-
tive upon the committee they may be found in
the fact that the Nebraska country occupies
the same relative position to the Slavery q,ies-
ton as did New Mexico and Utah. when those
Territories were organized. 1t was disputed
point whether Slavery was prohibited by law
in the country acquired from Mexico. On the
one hand, it was contended, as g legal propo-
slt'on, that Slavery having been prohibited by
the enactments of Mexico, according to the
laws of nations we received the country with
all its local laws and domestic institutions at
tached to the soil, 80 far as they did not con-
fiict with the Constitution of the United States
and that a law, either protecting or prohibit
ing Slavery, was not repugnant to that instru.
ment, as was evidenced by the fact that one
half OF the States of the Union tolerated, while
the other half prohibited, the institution Of
Slavery. On the other hand, it was insisted
that, by virtue of the Constitution of the United
States, every citizen had right to remove to
any Territory of the Union, and carry his
w.
whether that property consisted in persons or
things. The difficulties arising from this diver
sity of opinion were greatly aggravated by the
fact that there were many persons, on both
sides OF the legal controversy, who were un-
willing to abide the decision of tho courts ON
the matters in dispute. Thus, among thosc
who claimed that the Mexican laws were still
in force, and, consequently that Slavery was
already prohibited in those territories by valid
enactment, there were many who insisted upon
Congress making the matter certain by enact
ing another prohibition. In like manner, some
Of those who argued that the Mexican laws
had ceased to have any binding force, and that
the Constitution tolerated and protected slave
property in those territories, wero unwilling to
trust the decision of the courts upon that point,
and insisted that Congress should, by direct
enactment remove all legal obstacles to the
introduction of slaves into those territories.
"Such being the character Of the controversy
in respect to the territory acquired from Mex
100, a similar question has arisen in regard to
the right to hold slaves in the proposed Terri
tory of Nebraska, when the Indian laws shall
be withdrawn and tho country thrown open TO
emigration and settlement. BY the eighth sec-
ton of An act to authorize the people Of the
Missouri Territory to form Constitution and
State Government, and for the admission of
ing with the original States, and to prohibit
Slavery in certain Territories, approved March
6, 1920, it was provided, That in all territory
ceded by France to the United States, under
the name OF Louisiana, which lies north of thir-
ty-slx degrees and thirty minutes north latitude,
not included within the limits of the State con-
templated by this act, Slavery and involuntary
servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of
crimes whereof the parties shall have boon duly
convicted, shall be, and is hereby, forever pro-
hibited: PROVIDED, alacdys That any person
escaping into the same, from whom labor or
service is lawfully claimed in any State or Ter
ritory of the United States such fugitive may
be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the per-
son claiming his or her labor Or service, as
aforesaid
"Under this section, as in the case of the
Mexican law in New Mexico and Utah. it is a
disputed point whether Slavery is prohibited in
the Nebraska country by vGhd enactment The
decision of this question involves the constitu-
tional power of Congress TO pass laws prescri-
bling and regulating the domestic Institutions of
the various Territories of the Union In the
opinion of those eminent statesmen who hold
that Congress is invested with no rightful au-
thority to legslate upon the subject Of Slavery
in the Territories, the eighth section of the act
preparatory to the admission of Missouri is null
and void while the prevailing sentiment in
large portion of the Union sustans the doctrine
that the Constitution of the United States &C.
cures to every citizen an unalienable right to
move into any of the Territories with his prop
erty, of whatever kind and description, and to
hold and enjoy the same under tho sanction of
law
:" Your committee do not feel themselves
called upon to enter into the discussion of these
controyerted questions They involve the Same
grave issues which produced the agitation. the
sectional strife, and the fearful struggle of 1850
AS Congress deemed it wise and prudent to re-
frain from deciding the matter in controversy
then either by affirming or repeating the Mex
lean laws, Or by an act declaratory of the true
intent of the Constitution, and the extent of
the protection afforded by it to slave property
IN the Territories, SO your committee are not
prepared now to recommend departure from
the course pursued on that memorable occa-
sion, either by affirming or repeating the eighth
section OF the Missouri act, or by any act de-
claratory of the meaning of tho Constitution
in respect to the legal points in dispute"
Therefore, the committee framed the Ne.
braska bill after the model of toe Utah bill,
with view to auoid any expression of opinion,
by Congress, respecting the Missouri Compro
mise, determining to leave that question, as
the Utah bill had left the question of the va
lidity of the Mexican Laws prohibiting Sla-
very, to judicial decision. This was, at least,
logical The bill was the legitimate sequence
of the report. Bat that bill has been subst-
tuted by another, srh1h is fiat contradiction
to the report-for the fourteenth section of the
naVv b,Il dacI. roo that