The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-04-21

constitutional provisions for, far any number Of people
nave been permitted to ask for and aate for such
IN the constituton they desired made but here
simple law Of Congress which not only Is be altered
without subecting to the loss political standing
imposes restriction tho future legislation which wrong
IN principle and II viii be OF most dangerous example,
4 The ordinary idea that this Missouri Compromise was
measure started and carried forward in behalf of human
ity is great error II originated from very different
motive and pushed forward to accomplish very differ
ent purposes Mr. Jefferson, in his letter to Iafaye
says:
On the eclipse OF federalism with us, although
tncton its leaders got mp the Missouri question, under the
iaise front of essenDg the slavery with the
which might insure them the President The people Of
the North went bindfod into the snare followed their lead
crs for awhile with zeal truly moral and audable until
they became sensible that they nurng instead Of aid
ing the real interest of the slaves that they been used
merely tools for eeconeerng purposes and that trick Of
hypocrisy then fell as quick ii had been got up"
The circumstance attending It's adoption is in perfect
agreement with the account OF its origin political
aouure. The quiet times of Mr.. Monrocs administration
broken in upon without any apparent adequate
and the country TO great excitement Men who
had participated III the time that tried mems souls
filled with terror and thought they heard the kne of the
Union. The high priest of sectionasm fresh from the
Hartford concave fed the flame of jealousy and
try rent with excitement In the final adjustment OF
the difficulty northern who stood with the South
were accused and denounced for treachery the
Union but to their section of country Sir curious
fact that of the supporters Of the Missouri Compo-
mise which is popular but at the time Of its pas
sage so obnoxious, burned in efgy for the hateful
deed by the same party who at this day burning
others in eiigy for declaring ii imperative
propose to give in concise form, in addition what
have already said particular reasons why think the in
hbitng clause OF the act of 1920 usually called the Mis-
souri, Compromise should be declared imperative.
First am opposed to continuing "a geographical line,
concdine with a marked principle moral and political"
The prohibition above SO deg 80 min is either right or
wrong II the former 1t should be UNIVERSAL if the latter
! il should dc abolished.
Second II is the Wilmot proviso in another form This
al b,,t thn
country in the election of Franklin Pierce who did not
accept the nomination "with the resolutions annexed but
boldly and noby ayowed that his Judgment approved and
his heart loved the principles Of the nominating convention
which repudiated the proviso
Third 1t puts penalty upon emigration, as a moments
reflection will prove Sir every constituent of mine has
this day the right to vote upon the question whether s
very shall exist in the community in which he resides
if he saw fit to to Nebraska shall he lose this
right? Will the government nfct the penalty of losing
rights long enjoyed for the offence emgrang to new Ter
ritorie2 Wisdom would dictate that bountes should be
bestowed upon those who incur the harshps and deprv
tons of peopng uninhabted regions. Thus fathers
thought when they charged George III with the endeayor
to prevent the population of these States by refusing
laws to encourage the emigration Of foreigners hher
Let not their do than initiate the example which
they condemned.
Fourth. If the South will give up the Missouri Com
promise the North should not kcepit Coming
their shadows before them and do not doubt the time
will when glorious constitution shall extend its
jurisdiction the North American continent While
the present points TO sea-grt isle as the Mistress the flu
re will point to oceanhound republic the Master
the
In this prospective enlargement the fair plains of Mexi-
co will be an early acquisitions and shall northern men be
denied this field OF enterprise2 II the North
so valiant for the Missouri line with what consistency
they resist its application 10 Mexican acquisition? Are
they prepared the establishment Of IL there
Why sir il would he the denial 10 the industry and ecr-
~ Of the North domain unsurpassed in the circuit Of
the sun Sir circumstances have materially changed since
the legislation Of 1920 the continuance Of which is
garded necessary for the benefit of the free States
Then there equal vote in the Senate from slave
and free States Then there might have been adyan-
ge IN decaraiory legislation although the history Of the
ordinance of 1887 vors the opinion that such declarations
useless Now that the free States have majores
both branches of Congress il ordinances effected
for the purpose intended do they need them for their
curiy and proection3 Mnoritics nee the protection
rules majorilies do they please within the
1 of the constitution
Ny fifth and last special for going against the
Missouri Compromise perhaps should have been given first
namely: that iii is inconsistent with the legislation Of
i IS50.h
A senator from my own State [Nr FrssEsprSl speak
ing Of the circumstances attending the passage Of the
promise measures of 1850, says
Sir the whole country had been threatened with dsso
luton Of the Union We heard much of concord and broth
ey love- We Of the free States, especially ominouy
informed that certain reeatng gentlemen of The South were
recoect i dissolved three times in this
livery chamber. At any rate the day appointed but
from defect the slipped by and
thing not the bolt did fall Sir, it l. well
dertood that that threat that preence the free States
were induced to yield the Wlmot proviso."
ms Is IN huHlstOn ilat Nntn IthD ana New Mexico
were organized, the restrictive policy yielded and
given up The people Of those Territories have the right
Of doing they please The immuntes which our pre-
deceors granted TO Utah and New Mexico should be given
10 Nebraska and Kansas; and should not be guilty o
dealing literally by conquered provinces than BY
territory consecrated by ownership of half century.
Among the objections 10 the measure, IL s said as
have before remarked that Its effect will be TO dedicate
rtory free TO slavery win confess that II Is
what difficult for TO understand in what Ter
rtory is dedicated 10 any interest which Ia left like
white piece Of paper the inhabitants write such law
upon they please, consistent with the constitution
4 viii not occupy time in proving that the inhabancy
OF these Territories is not to be materially affected by de
oarng the Missouri Compromise imperative but win
tent myself in quoting the opinions of others.
4 Says Senator BADGER, of North Carolina;
81 have idea Of seeing slave population In ehe,
Nebraska Kansas than have Of seeing in Massachusetts,
i not a whit"
i Says Senator BUuEn, Of South Carolina
"lt is certain that Kansas and Nebraska will never b,
slavchoding States"
4 Says Senator EVERETT, Of Massachusetts,;
al quite everybody admits that this is not be
slayehoding region"
Il Sir for the purpose Of showing the mode and manner
which the opponents Of this bill adopt prove that II
tahshcs slavery, well ms to give Illustration Of the
ndor Of reverend and learned doctors teachers OF youth
writers moral science" will read extract from
speech of DIR. Wayland at Providence Rhode Island;
We have protest against the bill before Con
gress for establishing the Territorial Of Neba
ka and Kansas The feature in this bill against which
protest is that in all that territory, unnhabe
by white men, either free slave States be organized
at the win Of settlers On the face Of it, then places
slavery and freedom equal terms, and procsims that free
=