Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-02-01

ed, and repudiated your Ordinance. The Or
| dinance said that Slavery should be forever
/ prohibited in that country. The Constitution
| with which you received them into the Union
as State said that all slaves then in the State
should remain slaves for life and that all per-
SONS born OF slave parents after certain day,
should be free at certain age, and that all
persons born in the State after certain other
day, should be free from the time Of their birth.
Thus their State Constitution as well as their
Territorial legislation, repudiated your Ordi-
nance illinois, therefore, is a case in point to
prove that whenever you have attempted to
dictate institutions to any part Of the United
States you have failed. The same ia true,
though not to the same extent, with reference
to the Territory Of Indiana where there were
many slaves during the time Of its Territorial
existence, and believe also there were few
in the Territory Of Ohio
Bnt sir, these Abolition confederates in their
manifesto, have also referred to the wonderful
results Of their policy in the State of Iowa and
the Territory Of Minnesota Here, again, they
happen to be in fault az to the laws Of the
land, The act to organize the Territory Of
Iowa did not prohibit Slavery, but the people
| OF Iowa were allowed to do az they pleased
under the Territorial Government for the sixth
section Of that act provided that the legislative
authority should extend to all rightful subjects
of Legislation except as to the disposition Of
the public lands, and taxes in certain cases. but
not excepting Slavery. II may however, DO
said by some that Slavery was prohibited in
Iowa by virtue of that clause in the Iowa act
which declared the laws Of Wisconsin to be in
force therein, inaslnuch as the Ordinance Of
1887 was one Of the laws Of Wisconsin IF,
however, they say this they defeat their object,
because the very clause which transfers the
laws Of Wisconsin to Iowa, and makes them Of
force therein, also provides that those laws are
subject to be altered, modified, or repealed, by
the Territorial Legislature Of Iowa Iowa,
therefore, was left to do as she pleased Iowa,
when she came to form Constitution and
State Government, preparatory to admission
into the Union, considered the subject of free
and slave institutions calmly dispassionately,
without any restraint or dictation, and deter.
mined that it would be to the interest Of her
people in their climate, and with their produc-
tions to prohibit Slavery; and hence Iowa be-
came free State by virtue Of this great prin-
ciple Of allowing the people to do as they
please, and not in obedience to any Federal
command
The Abolitionists are also in the habit Of re-
fcrring to Oregon as another instance of the
triumph Of their Abolition policy. There again
they have overlooked or misrcprcsented the
4 ". IL.
or il it is not, it ought to be, that for about
twelve years you failed to give Oregon any
Government or any protection; and during that
period the inhabitants of that country estab-
lishcd Government Of their own, and, by vir-
tue Of their own laws passed by their own rep
resentatives before you extended your jurisdic-
4 ton over them, prohibited Slavery by q
unanimous vote. Slavery was prohibited
there by the action of the people themselves,
and not by virtue Of any legislation Of Congress.
1t is true that, in the midst Of the tornado
which swept over the country in l84s, 1S49,
and 1850, a provision was forced into the Ore
gon bill prohibiting Slavery in that Territory
but that only goes to show that the object of
those who pressed it was not 80 much to estab-
lish free institutions as to gain political ad-
vantage by giving an ascendency to their pc
culiar doctrines in the laws of the land for
Slavery having been already prohibited there,
and no man proposing to establish it, what was
the necessity for insulting the people Of Oregon
\ by saying in your law that they should not do
that which they had unanimously said they did
not wish to do That was the only effect of
your legislation, 30 far as the Territory Of Ore
gon was concerned.
How was it in regard to California; Every
one of the Abolition confedcrates who have
! thus arraigned me and the Committee ON Ter
ritories before the country, have misrepresent-
ed our position, and misquotcd the law and the
fact, predicatcd that unless Congress interposcd
by law, aud prohibited Slavery in California,
it would inevitably become slaveholding
State Congress did not Interfere Congress
did not prohibit Slavery. There was~no en-
actn,ent upon the subject; but tho people
formed State Constitution, and then prohib.
tied Slavery.
Mr.. WELLER. The vote was unanimous
in the Convention of California for prohibition
i Mr.. DOUGLAS. So it was in regard to
Utah and New Mexico In 1850, wc who re-
sisted any attempt TO force institutions upon
the people Of those Territories inconsistent with
their wishes and their right to decide for them
selves, were denounced as Slavery propaganda
ists Every one Of us who was in favor Of the
Compromise Measures Of 1850 was arraigned
for having advocated a principle proposing to
introduce Slavery into those Territories, and
the people were told, and made to believe, that
unless we prohibited it by act Of Congress,
Slavery would necessarily and inevitably be
introduced into these Territories
Well, sir, we did establish the Territorial
Governments Of Utah and New Mexico with
out any prohibition. We gave 10 these Adolf
tionists full opportunity of proving whether
their predictions were true or false Years
have rolled round, and the result is before u.s.
The people there have not passed any law rec
ognising or establishing, or introducing or pro-
tecting, Slavery in the Territories,
know of but one Territory OF the United
States where Slavery does exist, and that ono
is where you have prohibited it by law; and it
Is this very Nebraska Territory In defiance
Of the 9Th section Of the act Of 1920 in defiance
Of Congressional dictation, there have been, not
many, but few slaves introduced heard
xontator of tha Gnsnnl tho cthar da oo,, , a.
with member Of the Committee on Terrific
ries upon this subject This preacher was from
that country, and member put this question
to him: Have you any negroes out there? y
He said there were fow held by the Indians
asked him If there were not some held by
white men? He said there were few under
(. peculiar circumstances, and no gave an in
stance. An Abolition missionary, very good
man. had gone there from Boston, and he took