The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1854-03-15

specimen of parliamentary dialeetirs; |;
but he added, with an emotion which
even he was unable to suppress. /" the
speech Of the 9TH of March. 1880.
lmueh ss ! have been reyiled for il.
when am dead win be allowed to 10
Of the greatest importance to the conn
try" Sir. he took the greatest inte-
rest in that speech. lie wished il 10
60 forth with specific title !; and. az.
ter some deliberztion, il Was called.
! BY his own direction. "a Speech for
the con,titution and the Union" Tie
INSCRIBED il To The people ~ Massaehu-
setfs. in dedication Of the most en-
phatic tenderness. and he rrriixed 10
IL that motto. which you all remember.
from Liyy. the most appropriate and
felieit"us quotation perhaps that was
ever made; True things rather than
pleasant things-Isra pro grafis: and
with that he sent il forth to the world.
Sir. in that speech his gigantic in
tellcct brought together all that il could
gather from the law Of nature, from
the Constitution Of the United States.
from our past legislation. from the ply.
sical features Of the region. To strength
en- him in that plan Of cancellation and
peace in which he feared that he might
not carry along with him the public
sentiment of the whole Of the country
which he particularly represented here.
At its close. when he dilated upon the
disastrous effects Of separation, he rose
TO strain Of impassioned eloquence
which has never been surpassed within
these walls. Every topic. every ar
gument. every fact was brought to
bear upon the point; and he felt that
all bis vast popularity was at stal
on the issue. Let me CONNIE nd to the
attention Of Senators, and let me ask
them to consider what weight is due
TO the authority Of such man, speak
ing under such circumstances and on
81 ch an occasion, when he tells yon
that the condition Of every foot Of land
in the country. for slavery or non-sls.
very, was fixed by some irrepcalable
law. And you are nov about to repeal
| the principal law WHICH ascertained
and fixed that condition, And, sir,
if the Senate will take ans heed Of the
opinion Of one 50 humble as myself, I
will say that | believe Mr.. Webster,
in that speech, went to the very verge
OF public sentiment in the non slave
holding States, and that to have gone
a hairs breadth further would have
been step too bold even for his great
weight Of character.
But pass over number OF points
to which | wished to make some allu-
sion. and proceed to another matter.
| think the chairman Of the Committee
on Territories did not return an el :
tirely satisfactory answer to the argu-
ment drawn from the fact that the
Missouri restriction, or the compromise
Of 1920, is actually and in terms re-
cognised and confirmed by the Ferris
torial legislation Of 1850 in the act or,
ganizing the Territory Of New Mexico.
The argument is this: That act Con-
tains prosiso that nothing therein
contained shall be construed to impair
or qualify the third article of the se-
cond section Of the resolutions for an
nexing Texas. When you turn to that
third article Of the second section Of
the resolution, you find that il recog-
nises BY name the Missouri compro-
mise.
Now, understand the chairman Of
the Committee ON Territories to saw
that all that part Of Texas 10 which
/ that restriction applied north Of s6o
so was cut Oft aud annexed to New
Mexico.
Mr.. DoucLAs. Not all annexed; but
large portion annexed, and all cut off.
| Mr.. EVERETT. But it does not seem
to me that this is an adequate answer.
In the frst place, the Senator tells us
that all north of So so was cut of
from Texas. But there was consi-
derable portion OF territory, as large
as four States of the size of conncc-
ticut. which was not incorporated into
New Mexico, and to which the proviso
still attaches. But whether that be SO
or not, would it not be a strange phe.
nomenon in Legislation that a subse-
quent act should be construed to su.
perscde, to nulify, to render inopera-
tive and void. by any operation or in
any way or form, a former act, which
IT expressly states nothing therein con-
tanned should qualify or impairl 1t
does not seem to me that this is so for
mally recognition that it is unnece.-
sary to inquire whether there is or is
not any portion of territory to which
in point of fact it attaches, especially
when the question is not whether Il
operates in Texas, but whether It op-
crates in Nebraska in its original To-
cation.
The Senator stated that, in point Of
n "a a. -. Al