Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-02-11


prospcctvey There is not the slightest allusion in
those bills to the Territory of Nebraska which the yig
liant Senator must have had strongly his mind Is
it not political mpossbility that if it conceived at
that time that measures were going through the two
Houses which were to give perpetual law to territorial
organization the Nebraska bill would not then have been
brought forward and in some way other made to enjoy
the benefit Of it. If benefit it be- But not word to this
effect intimated that know Of speak under
rection 1t entirely ignored, far am aware;
at any rate, attempt made at that time to pass
the Nebraska BILL containing the provisions Of the Utah
and New Mexico bills.
The compromise measures, as we all know, the
work of the hiryrst Congress- and the thirty
Congress Nebraska bill brought in by member
from the State of Missouri in the other House 1t passed
that body by majority Of more than two one. 1t
contested the ground Of injustice to the Indians; but
far as know speak again under correction have
not had time to read oil these volumnous debates
nothing, or next to nothing said the of
slavery. At any rate there attempt made TO in
corporate this provso 1t up here, and adopt
ed by and reported from the Committee Territories,
and brought up in the Senate towards the close of the
last session. and that occasion contested the
ground, and no attempt was made word said in
ference to these provsos the subject of slavery If
at that time the understanding that you enact
ing principle or precedent, any thing that would
carry with 1t rule governing this case is it possible
that no alusion should have been made to it on that
occasion? h#
conclude, therefore, sir that the compromise mea-
sures Of 1850 ended where they began with the Terri
tories of Utah and New Mexico to which they specifically
referred at rate that they established principle
which was to govern in other that they had no
prospective action to the organization of Territories
in all future time and certainly Retrospective action
upon lands subject to the restriction of 1920 and the posi-
tive enactment that you propose to declare nopera
tive and void. ~
trust that nothing which have now said will be
taken in derogaon of the compromises of 1850 adhere
to them; stand by them. do so for many reasons
One is respect for the memory Of the great who
the authors OF the-lghts and ornaments of the
try but now taken from its service would soon
If it were in my power undo their work. if for other
reason.
But beside this, am one Of those-I am moi ashamed
to itwho believed at that time and do still believe
that at that period the union Of these States in great
DANGER and that the adoption of the compromise
Of 1850 contributed materially that danger
and therefore, sir, say we'll out of respect to the
memory of the great who the authors of them
to the healing effect of the measures themselves
would adhere to them. They not perfect sup
pose that no body, either North South, thinks them
perfect They contain provisions not satisfactory
to the South and other provisions contrary the public
sentiment ofthe North but believed Mt the time they
the wisest, the best, the effective measures
which, under the circumstances could be adopted But
you do not strengthen them you do not show your
spect for them by giving them application which they
never intended to bear.
Before take my seat, sir will say few words in
desutory manner upon two Of the statements
which made by the chairman of the Committee on
Territories He said, if understood him, that the North
set the first example of making breach in the Missouri
compromise and find of doors that considerable i'm
portance attached to this dea that the violation
peal of the Missouri compromise at this time is but just
retort upon the North for having former
son set the example of violating it. do not think that
this is correctly satedhe reference to the legislation
of 1S4S when the North refused to extend the line of36
so to the Pacific ocean, which done the Senator
said under the influence of Northern with Free
soil proclivties" expression of that kind. do
not think the Senator shows his usual justice perhaps
may say not his usual candor this occasion That
took place two years before the compromise of 1850 and
IN MI lu NOT
ing ese at least settlement Of old scores and any
thing that dates from 184S be considered in refer
ence to those who took part in it, honoraby and fairly
settled and condoned in 1850. But, SIR how the
case This not carried by Northern votes
with Freesoil prociyities Far from it. If have read
the record Alright, the amendment which the Senator
moved in the Senate to incorporate the Missouri line into
the territorial bill for Oregon opposedby wcntyone
votes in this body Among those twentyone voters
every voter from New England There was the Senator
from Massachusetts, Mr. Webster There the lately |
deceased Senator from New Hampshire, Mr.. Atherton.
Both Of the votes from Ohio, Mr. Allen Of Them and
both from Wisconsin, were given against this extension of
the Missouri compromise Mr. Calhoun voted in favor Of
1.-THE amendment; butt If am not in error, when the
question next up upon the engrossment Of the BILL
amended he voted with those twenty side by side
with those who included in the designation of the
Senator from Illinois In the House the vote Stood if
remember the figures, hundred and twenty-one to
eighty-two--a majority of hiryn There was Isup
pose the whole vote, nearly the whole vote of the
tire savehoding delegation That surely them ought
with Freeso procivtes using those wogdsn the accep
tation commonly given to them which suppose the Sen
ator wishes to do.
No, sir that vote was given in conformity with the an
cen the universal the tradonary opinion and feeling
of the slavehodng States which forbid citizen Of
those States to do thing voluntarily except under
case of the sternest compusion such preserving the
union OF these States-and really would do almost any
thing to effect that obecto aid in carrying slavery into
territory where did not previously exist 1t was that
feeling which, in the revolutionary crisis universal
throughout the land for the savery feeling of that
time, take it, to have been mainly political sentiment
rather than moral religious one 1t was the same
feeling which, in 1887 led the whole Congress of the Con-
federation to unite in the ordinance of 1857 Mr. Jeer
in 1884, had proposed the proviso in reference
to oil the territory possessed by the United States
rs far down 49, which their southern boundary
1t the feeling take it, which led respectable
Southern members Of Congress, late 1920 to vote
for the restriction of slavery in the State Of Mssouro
which class believe there And, sir, it is
feeling, believe in my conscience, which, instead of be-
ing created, stimulated, favored by systematic ag
taton Of the subject is powerfully repressed and discour
aged by that very agitation; and if this bill passes the
Senate, as to NIL appearance it will, it will prove to de-
monstration that that feeling is not strong it
was in 1920 which, for my part ascribe mainly to the
reco of the conservative mind Of the nonsaveholding
States from this harassing and disastrous agitation.
single word sir, in respect to this supposed principle
of nonntervenon the part of Congress the subject
of slavery in the Territories confess am surprised to
find this brought forward and stated with much conf
dence established principle of the Government |
know that distinguished gentlemen held the opinion If
mistake not the very distinguished Senator from Mchi
gan (Mr. CAss) holds it, and has propounded it; and
pay all due respect and Difference to his authority which
conceive to be very high But not that any
such principle considered settled principle of the
territorial policy this country. Why, sir, from the