Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-02-18

of Nebraska and Kansas alone within the pur-
view oil these acts2 Ordothey reach,o The Pacl-
ticcoast. and embrace also Oregon and Washing
TONI DO they stop there. or do they take in
China and India and Anghanis,an, even TO the
gigantic base of the IIimalaya Mountainsl DO
they stop there, or, on the contrary, do they en-
circle the earth, and, meeting us again ON the
Atlantic coast. embrace the islands OF Iceland
and Greenland. and exhaust themselves on the
barren coasts Of Greenland and Labrador?
Sir, il the Missouri Compromise neither in
| lis spirit nor by lis letter extended the line OF
30 deg. 80 min. beyond the confines Of Louisi
ana, or beyond the then confines Of the United
States, for the terms are equivalent, then il was
no violation Of the Missouri Compromise in
| lS4S TO refuse TO extend il TO the subsequently
acquired possessions OF Texas, New Mexico,
and California.
But suppose we did refuse ioextend it; how
did that refusal work forfeiture of our vested
| rights under il q | desire To know that
Again: ii this forfeiture OF Nebraska oc-
CURED in 1913, as the Senator charges, how
does il happen that he not only failed in 1850,
when the parties were in court here, adjusting
their mutual claims, 10 demand judgment
against the free States, but, on the contrary,
even urged that the same old Missouri Com
promise line, yet held valid and sacred, should
be extended through 10 the Pacific Ocean2
come now TO the chief ground Of the de-
fence Of this extraordinary measure, which is,
that it abolishes geographical line Of division
between the proper fields Of free labor and slave
| labor, and refers the claim between them 10 the
people Of the Territories. Even if this great
change OF policy was actually wise and neces-
sary, | have shown that il is not necessary 10
make il now, in regard 10 The Territory of Ne
braska. Ii it would be just elsewhere, il would
beunjust in regard TO Nebraska, simply because,
for ample and adequate equivalents, fully re-
ceiyed, you have contracted in effect not TO
abolish that line there.
But why is this change of policy wise or
necessary Ii must be because either that the
extension of slavery is no evil, or because you
have not the power to prevent il at all, or be-
cause the maintenance OF geographical line
is no longer practicable.
! | know that the opinion is sometimes adj
vanced, here and elsewhere, that the extension
OF slavery, abstractly considered, is not an evil
but our laws prohibiting the African slave trade
are still standing on the statute book, and ex
press the contrary judgment Of the American
Congress and OF the American People pass
on, therefore, from that point.
Sir, do not like, more than others, geo
graphical line between Freedom and Slavery
/ Dut IL Is DeCduSc WOuiu nave, III ~ WcIc pos
sible, all our territory free Since that cannot
be, a line of division is Indispensable; and any
line is a geographical line.
The honorable and very acute Senator from.
North Carolina Mr.. BADGER has wooed us
most persuasively 10 waive our objections TO the
new principle, as il is called, Of non nterven-
ton, by assuring us that the Shareholder can
| only use slave labor where the soils and
climates favor the culture Of tobacco, cotton,
rice, and sugar. To which reply: None Of
them find these congenial soils or climates atthe
sources of the Mississippi, or in the valley of
the Rocky Mountains. Why, then, does he
want 10 remove the inhibition there?
But again: That Senator reproduces pleas
ing fiction Of the character Of slavery from the
Jewish history, and asks, Why not allow the
modern patriarchs TO 60 into new regions with
their slaves, as their ancient prototypes did, TO
make them more comfortable and happy
And he tells us, at the same time, that this in
diligence will not increase the number OF slaves.
| reply by asking, first, Whether slavery has
gained or lost strength by the diffusion Of il
over larger surface than il formerly covered
j Will the Senator answer that2 Secondly, /
quite admire the simplicity Of the patriarchal
times. But they nevertheless exhibited some
peculiar institutions quite incongruous with
i
namely, that of latitude Of construction of the
marriage contract. which has been carried by
one class OF so-called patriarchs into Utah. Ger
tainly, no one would desire TO extend that pecu-
I liar institution into Nebraska. Thirdly, slave
holders have also peculiar institution, which
makes them political patrlarchs. They reckon
| live OF their slaves "a equal To three reemen in
forming the basis Of Federal representation. IL
these patriarchs insist upon carrying their in
stituiion into new regions north OF So deg. 30
min, respectfully submit, that they ought 10
reassume the modesiy OF their Jewish prede.
ccssors, and relnquish this political feature Of
the system they thus seek To extend. Will
they do that2
Some Senators have revived the argument
that the Missouri COMPROMISE was unconsilu-
iional. But IL is one Of the peculiarites OF
compromises, that constitutional objections, like
all others. are buried under them by those who
make and ratify them, for the obvious reason
that the parties al once waive them. and re
ceive equivalents Certainly, the saveholding
States. which waived their constitutional OBJ
| ieciions against the Compromise Of 1890 and
accepted equivalents therefor, cannot be- allowed
to revive and offer them now rs a reason for ~.
fIsing 10 the mons laveholding States their
rights under that Compromise, without first
restoring the equivalents which they received
on condition Of surrendering their constitutional
objections.
For arguments sake, however, let this reply
be waived, aud lei us look al this constitutional
objection. You say that the exclusion Of
slavery by the Missouri Compromise reaches
through and beyond the existence Of the region
organized as a Territory, and prohibits slavery
FOREVER, even in the States TO be organized
out Of such Territory, while. ON the contrary.
the States, when admitted, will be sovereign,
and must have exclusive jurisdiction over
slavery for themselves. Let this, too. be granted
But Congress, according 10 the Constitution,
may admit new Slates.o II Congress may
ADM, then Congress may also refuse TO admit
that is 10 say, may reject new States. The
greater includes the less; therefore, Congress
may admit. on condition that the States shall
exclude slavery. IL such a condition should