The daily union., 1854-02-26

not Justly be made against her No. sir no, sir il wa
the North that refused TO abide by her bargain.
This afhfm aud now let see how the record stand
upon tue subject The first time that thus question cam
up afterwards was within twelve months IRON The dat
OF the act ITSELF and before the Congress II came
up on the application OF Missouri Tor admission. in pursu
ance oil the provisions OF the very act that contains IN
''covenanl She had formed Stale constitution II
pursuance OF II she had violated OF lis conditions
The whole South for letting her be admitted, ant
the entire North, nearly, were against IT, Here s ths
vote rejecting her admission. The vote was: 10 for IT
and 80 against 1.-THE North in mass, almost, agans
i il Why was this refusal Ii they recognised the provIs
ions OF the act OF March preceding containing any
ton binding upon them IN the nature OF "contIacf OF
compact. why did they refuse TO fulfil III The preeI
assigned was that the constitution OF Missouri contained
clause empowering the legislature TO pass law to pre-
vent the introduction OF free persons OF color as have
stated But this could have been nothing but prelext
for at that very day Massachusetts had similar law in
actual force upon her statute book. The truth is, the
North at that early day showed that she did not regard
the provisions OF the act OF 1920 as al all obligatory
upon them, anything like compact. The real OBJ
lection to the final admission of Missouri State was
that slavery tolerated within her limits By her con-
stlution. II was the old question which gave trouble
bespfe this coarac" OF 1920 was made. Il was then
months, therefore, had not passed before the North
pudiated this compact, BY refusing Missouri admission
without another compromise.
Well, the next time this question arose the ad
mission OF Arkansas into the Union, IN 1886. This
State formed OF part Of the Louisiana purchase
south of 90 deg 80 mn BY the terms of the Missouri
|
she 10 come in slave Stale. Did the North then
recognise and act upon these terms The gentleman
from New York MI FGsTS%k EN- sad ID, 'ha tins division
SO, ask him when or where! Did they raise no OBJ
jection when Arkansas applied for admission Let us
see here is the record: #a.
Mr John Quincy Adams in this House, June 13, 1896,
moved amendment so as to make section OF the
bill for the admission OF that State read thus:
'And no,hng this contained shall be construed
by Congress the article in tue constitution st
the said State relating and TO the emancipation
| of slaves" &c.
| "St harpng my daughter p
On vote, the effect of which was to allow this amend
ment, there eighty in favor of atordng the oppor
tun,y. There were hundred and nine on the oppo
site side, which prevented its being offered Of these
eighty votes, some were from the Soulh Their object
may have been to get upon this distinct question
OF the recognition by the House o the line established in
| 1920. But after the amendment was ruled out on the
direct vote for the admission OF Arkansas with constr
tuition toeratng slavery though she was south OF SO
deg 80 min there ity-two under The lead oil
Mr. Adams in the negative,eye OF them, believe.
/ from the Notth | have The journal before me. And
amongst these names see Heman Allen. Horace Ever.
cit, Hiland Hall, Henry F. Jones, and Wilsm Slade-
the entire delegation from Vermont, The gep,eman's s
lMr MEAcHAMsl own predecessor upon this floor, he
who then representeda portion OF the same constituency
that that gentleman does, recorded his vote against
the admission of Arkansas. Did he or his colleagues
have any other objection TO except that it slave
State II they regarded the line OF SO deg. 80 min.
solemn between the North and South, why did
they not give il their sanction al that time!
The gentleman spoke OF ''honor'-
/ al thank thee, Je W, for teaching that wordr'
Where was the 'hono" Of The representatives of YER
mon, that occasion In whose keeping placed
suppose the hands of their constituents, of whom the
gentleman one The representatives from The gen.
tlenan's own State did then unaDimousy-most d,st6n-
oraby il he chooses characterize their conjact-re-
puiiae that Contract which the South offered
disturb until i was totally abandoned BY an over
whelnng majority of the North, as | shall presently
show. have shown that 1t was disregarded within
twelve months after II was made and refused to be
toned by the representatives OF the gen'leman's own
| State in 1886, the first time il came up az ain
! | will now 60 on, and show the gentleman and the
House when it came up again, and when il was finally
repuda'ed By the amos, entire North
| Mr., MEACHAM, Qnierruptng) would inquire OF
The gentleman II the senators iron Vermont did not vote
! Mr. STEPHENS. For whata
| Mr. MEACHAM. For the admission of Missouri
| Mr.. STEPHENS, am not speaking OF the Senate,
but Of the House. have none but the House records
before me. | am dealing with members in this body, or
those who preceded here. II the gentleman DESIRES
he can answer Tor his predecessors IRON the Slate OF
Vermont on this floor.
about the /" Missouri linz OF SO deg. 80 min" was the
xa,ion of Texas That measure was carried with
that line IN it, hut not by the northern votes IL was the
South, still willing 10 abide it, that carried il then There
were one hundred and twenty five northern votes given
that occasion OF these. only hily-one were for The
annexation with this line established IN 1t while there
seventy four large majority. who refused TO give
i, their sanction. do not mean to say that all who
ted against that opposed 10 that line OF sell
tlemeni. Many OF them bad other reasons. And know
full WE'LL for was here that OF those hy-one northern
who voted for u, many OF them would not have
voted for the recognition OF that line If the question had
come up by itself Bot those resolutions o annexation
were so presented that they had TO be taken whole,
ALL allude TO this vote merely because II
the next time in order when the question up and
the vote certainly fails TO show that the North, even
majority of them, gave IL their sanction, For that
son only alIude TO It.
come down now 10 another step Of our progress-to
the period IRON ls47 to 1850 The gentleman from YER
mr. NIL haIa "A ma ust trafl klhI
he exhibited Tie pointed out to US the boundary
OF the Louisiana purchase IL commenced at the mouth
OF the Sabine up that ver TO the BAD deg OF north
latitude; thence due north to the Red river thence up
that The Tooth deg OF west longitude from Green
wich thence due north 10 the Arkansas river, and up
ha, river to the 42d deg Of north latitude. and thence
due west to the south seas, the Pacific ocean. BY
we had title ceded to from France territory sx-
tending to the Pacific Well, that OF course in
cuded Ofegon--ihat s, according TO the genllernans
map derived title 10 Oregon under the cession from
France in so3 and that territory part OF the Lous
ana purchase. Mr Jefferson considered IL and sent
Lewis and Clarke TO explore the country.
Well, then, how did the South act towards this SOL
emn compact az il is called, the line OF So deg
80 mio when came TO organize territorial govern
ment for Oregon in lsiTl The southern boundary was
the l2d deg Of north latitude, and OF course the whole
of II lay north OF 80 deg so min. AT this time I'm lSi7)
IN a war with Mexico, and 1t was well under
stood 10 be the policy OF the ad ninsra'ion to acquire
territory from that government, which, IN all probability,
would, to extent be south OF the line 80 deg 30
min. From The votes of the House upon what was well
kno vn the "WiImot proviso," the South had just rea
majority Of the North disregard entirely what's now
called a covenant o. 1920" When, there