The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-02-09

to go back to the original policy of prescribing
boundaries to the limitation of free Institutions
and of slave institutions, by geographical
line, in order to avoid all controversy in Con-
gress upon the subject Hence they extended
that geographical line through all the territory
purchased from France, which was as far as
our possessions then reached. 1t was not sim
ply to settle the question on that piece of coun-
try but it was to carry out great principle,
by extending that dividing line as far west as
our territory went, and running it onward on
each new acquisition of territory. True, the
express enactment of the eighth section of the
Missouri act now called the Missouri Compro-
mise act only covered the territory acquired
| from France; but the principles Of the act, the
OBJECTS OF It's adoption, the reasons in its sup
port, required that it should be extended indefi-
nitely westward, so far as our territory might
| 90, whenever new purchases should be made.
Thus stood the question up to IS45. when
the joint resolution for the annexation of Texas
passed. There was inserted in that provision,
suggested in the first instance, and brought be-
| fore the House Of Representatives by myself
| extending the Missouri Compromise line indef-
nitely westward through the territory of Texas
Why did | bring forward that proposition
| Why did the Congress of the United States
| adopt 1t! Not because it was of the least prac-
UuCfIlCn
very within the limits of Texas was concerned :;
| for no man ever dreamed that it had any prac
teal effect there. Then why was it brought
forward! 1t was for the purpose of presery-
| ing the principle in order that it might be ex-
| tended still further westward even to the Pa
cifc ocean, whenever We should acquire the
country that far. | will here read that clause
| In the joint resolution for the annexation of
| Texas. 1t is the third article second section.
and is in these words:
"New States of convenient size not exceed
ing four in number, in addition to said State
of Texas having sufficient population, may
hereafter, by the consent of said State, be
formed out of the territory thereof, which shall
be entitled to admission under the provisions
of tho Federal Constitution And such States
as may be formed out of that portion of said
territory, lying south of SO deg. 30 min. north
latitude, commonly known as the Missouri
Compromise line, shall be admitted into the
Union with or without Slavery, as the people
of each State asking admission may desire
And IN such State or States as shall be formed
out OF said territory north of said Missouri
Compromise line, Slavery or involuntary seryi-
tude Except for crime) shall be prohibited"
It will be seen that that contains very re-
markable provision, which ia, that when States
lying north of 80 deg. 80 min. apply for admis-
sion, Slavery shall be prohibited in their con-
situations | presume no one pretends that
Congress could have power thus to fetter a
State applying for admission into this Union :;
but it was necessary to preserve the principle
Of the Missouri Compromise line, in order that
it might afterwards be extended, and it was
supposed that while Congress had no power TO
| impose any such limitation, vet as that was q
compact with the State of Texas, that State
could consent for herself, that, when any por-
ton of her own territory, subject to her own
jurisdiction and control, applied for Constitu-
ton, it should be in a particular form; but that
provision would not be binding on the new
State one day after it was adAiitted into tho
Union. The other provision was, that such.
States as should lie south of SO deg. 80 min
should come into the Union with or without
Slavery, IA each should decide, in It's Constitu-
ton. Then, by that act the Missouri Compro-
mise was extended indefinitely westward, 50 far
as the State of Texas weus, that is, to the Rio
del Norte; for our Government at the time
recognised the Rio del No-te as ITS boundary
We recognised, in many ways and among
them by even paying Texas for it, in order
that it might be included in and form a portion
of the Territory of New Mexico.
Then, sir, in 1913, we acquired from Mexico
the country between the Rio del Norte and
the Pacific Ocean. Immediately after that &C,
QUESTION, the Senate on my own motion voted
into bill n provision to exteEd the Missouri
Compromise indefinitely westward to the Pacific
Ocean, in the Same sense and with the Same
understanding with which it was originally
adopted. That provision passed this body by
decided majority, | think by ten at least and
went to the House of Representatives, and was
defeated there by Northern votes.
Now, sir, let us pause and consider for mo-
ment. The first time that the principles of the
Missouri Compromise wero ever abandoned. the
first time they were ever rejected by Congress-
was by the defeat IF that provision in the House
of Representatives in 1913 Ky whom was
shat defeat effected! BY Northern votes with
Free Soil proclivities 1t was the defeat of
that Missouri Compromise that reOpened the
Slavery agitation with oil its fury. IL was the
defeat of that Missouri Compromise that cre-
ated the tremendous struggle of 1850. 1t was
the defeat Of that Missouri Compromise that
created the necessity for making a new COM
promise in 1850. Had we been faithful TO the
principles of the Missouri Compromise in I848,
this question would not have arisen. Who was
it that was faithless | undertake to say it
was the very men who now insist that tho Mis-
souri, Compromise was a solemn compact, and
should never be violated or departed from.
Every man who is now assailing the principle
of the bill under consideration, 80 far as | am
advised, was opposed to the Missouri Compro-
mise in 1913. The very men who now arraign
me for departure from the Missouri COmpro-
mise are the men who successfully violated it,
repudiated il, and caused it to be superseded
by the Compromise measures of 1850. Sir, it
is with rather bad grace that the men who
proved false Themselves should charge upon me
and others, who we're ever faithful, the rospon-
sibiities and consequences Of their own treach-
cry.
Then, sir, as before remarked, the defeat of
the Missouri Compromise in 1913 having Gre
sted the necessity for the establishment of a
new one in 1850, let us see what that Compro-
mise was.
The leading feature Of the Compromise Of
1850 was Congressional non-intervention rs TO
Slavery in the Territories that the people of
the Territories and Of all the States, were to
be allowed to do as they pleased upon the sub.
ject of Slavery, subject only to the provisions
of the Constitution of the United States.
That sir, was tho leading feature of the Com
promise Measures OF 1850. Those measures,
therefore, abandoned the idea of a geograph-
cal line as the boundary between free States
and slave States--abandoned it because COM
PEELED to do it from an inability to maintain
it-arid, in lieu of that, substituted a great
principle Of selfgovernment which would al
low tho people to do as they thought proper.
Now, the question is when that new Compro
mise. resting upon that great fundamental
principle of freedom, was established, was it
not an Abandonment of the old ono--the geo.
graphical line? Was it not q supcrsedure of
the old one, within the very language of the
substitute for the bill which is now under con-
sideration? say it did supersede it, because
n aDpliad Ylrovisions well M tho Moth ~,
to the south of SO deg. 80 min. 1t established
q nrincinle which WIS ennallx annlicahln 20 tho