The Camden weekly journal. [volume] (Camden, South-Carolina) 1853-1861, 1854-03-07
The Missouri Compromise.

Mr. Calhoun, in one of his speeches on The
ordinance of l7S7, speaks as follows
The act itsclfwas unauthorized. The articles
Of confederation conferred not q shadow of
authority on Congress to pass the ordinance
os is admitted by Mr.. Madison, and yet this
unauthorized, one-sided act (as it has turned
out to bc) passed in the last moments of the
old confederacy, was relied on as a precedent
(auding to the Missouri Compromise of lS2O)
for excluding the South from two.thirds of the
territory acquired from France by the Louisi
ana treaty, and the whole of the Oregon terri
tory, and is now relied on to justify her exclu.
sion from all the territory acquired by the
Mexican war, and all that may be acquired
hereafter.
Tile Works Of Calhoun, ToL l, page $50.
Again, 10Th February, lS47, Mr.. Calhoun
remarked as follows:
Sir, here let me say word as to the Com
promise line. | have always considered it as
a great error, highly injurious to the South,
because it surrendered, for mere temporary
purposes, those high principles of the constitu-
ton upon which think we ought to stand.-
| am against any compromise line. Yet
would have been willing to acquiesce in a con
tnuancc of the Missouri Compromise in or
der to preserve under the present trying cir.
cumstance$, the peace Of the Union. One Of
the resolutions in the House to that effect was
offered at my suggestion. | said to a friend
there "let us not be diSturbers of this Union;
abhorrcnt to my feelings as is that compromise
line, let it be adhered to in good faith =; and if
other portions Of the Union arc willing to stand
by it, let us not refuse to stand by it. 1t has
kept peace for some time, and in the present
circumstances, perhaps, it would be better to
be continued as it is" But it was voted down
by an overwhelming majority. 1t was renew.
cd by gentleman from a non-slaveholding
State, and again voted down by an overwhel-
mino majoriv..
the compromise. A compromise is but an act
of Congress. 1t may be overruled at any time.
1t gives US no security. But the constitution
is stable. 1t is rock. On it we can stand.
1t is a firm and stable ground, on which we
can better stand in opposition to fanaicsm
than on the shifting sands of compromise.
Let us be done with compromises. Let us
60 back and stand upon the constitution.
Elsewhere, Mr.. Calhoun uses the following
language:
But 60 farther, and hold that the consttu,
ton and justice are the safest and easiest
guard on which the question can be settled,
regarded in reference to party. 1t may be
settled on that ground simply by non-action
by leaving the territories free and open to all
a. tbo tl,n,
continue so, and when they become States, to
adopt whatever constitution they please, with
the single restriction to he republican in order
to their admission into the Union. If a party
cannot safely take this sbroad and solid position
and successfully maintain It, what other can it
take and maintain ? If it cannot maintain it.
self by an appeal to the great principles of jus
tice, the constitution and self government, to
what other sufficiently strong to uphold them
in public opinion, can they appeal? | greatly
mistake the character Of the people Of this Tn,
ion, if such an appeal would not prove success
full if either party shouldhave the magnanimity
to step forward and make it. 1t woulG, in
my opinion, be received with shouts of appro-
baton by the patriotic and intelligent in every
quarter. There is deep feeling pervading
the country that the Union and our political
institutions are in danger, which such a course
would dispel.
And again:
There is very striking difference between
the positions in which the slaveholdmg States
stand in reference to the subject under consid
Grafton. The former desire no action of the
government demand no law to give them any
advantage in the territory about to be estab-
lshed: are willing to leave it and other terrific.
rieS belonging to the United States open to all
their citizens so long as they continue to be
territories, and when they cease to be, to leave
it TO their inhabitants to form such govern
mcnts as may suit them, without restriction or
condition, except that imposed by the constitu-
ton as a pregui>itc for admission into the I'm
ion. In short, they are willing to leave the
whole sub bicct where the constitution and the
great fundamental principles of scll:govern
meut place if. On the contrary, the nou.slavc
holding States instead of being willing to leave
it on this broad and equal foundation, demand
the intcrpostion Of the government, and the
passage of an act to exclude the citizens of the
slaveholding States from cmigraring with their
property into the territory, in order to give
their citizens and those they may permit the
exclusive right Of settling in it, while it re.
mains in that condition, preparatory to subicc
ting it to like restrictions and conditions when
it becomes Il State.