The daily union., 1854-11-19

Territories and the admiooton OF new States OBVIOUS 70
every who is familiar with the that led 10 the
adoption of the Compromise OF 1850 From 1920 to lS4s
had been the policy Of the to avoid sectional
conflicts upon the slavery question by he
across the continent far territory might extend
upon the parallel of SO 80 north latitude toerang slavery
the side and forever prohibiting II on the other
This line is known the eMssourCompromise line men
entered Congress for the first time in ls4s found ,hs
line upon the statute-book and although did not then
approve any than Of the principles involved ln
it, yet willing to abide by and carry u ou' IN 'he
in which it originally adopted, rather thah
to expose the country TO the pers and convuohs OF
slavery agitation Accordingly when IN ls4o ieaas wac
annexed the United States and there were all the ee
of slavery agitation ready to burst forth III ther
fury was the opinion that all OF the reasons and consd
eratons which induced the adoption OF that line IN 1880
called for its extension indefinitely westward through
the acquisitions far might acquire the eouh-
try That proposition inserted in the joint resolutions
for the annexation of Texas vt my suggestion and oy re-
cevng the acquiescence if not the appreciation OF the
whole country proved successful in avoiding the calam
ties which intended to be averted by it. Again. IN
l84s when by the treaty with Mexico acquired Cali
orna Utah and New Mexico and by that act incurred the
responsibility Of providing for the Territories
thus ceded the inquiry arose how the slavery was
to be adjusted and a sectional conflict avoided. To my
mind all the and considerations which induced the
original adoption of the line of 36 80 in 1890 and Its ex
tension in 845 the dividing line between freedom and
slavery between free territory and slave territory between
free States and slave States demanded the extension OF
that line to the Pacific in the sense and with
the understanding with which 1t was originally
adopted in order preserve peace and friendly relations
between the different States and sections OF the Union
Deeply impressed with this conviction proposed and the
Senate adopted provision in territorial bill in August,
l84s for the extension of the Missouri Compromise to The
Pacific ocean, Applause
When the measure was sent the House of Representa-
ves it promptly, and perhaps may say with truth
Indignantly rejected in that body by northern men with
ee-so procvities 1t is not my purpose the present
occasion question the propriety OF that vote or the pa
trosm of those who gave It, but to call attention to the
fact that If that line had been extended to the Pacific as
proposed by myself ahd sanctioned by vote of the SEN
there would have been and forever end of the
pause flor if the line had been thus extended to the
Pacific and had been adhered to in good aith It would
only have settled the question forever as TO all terri
tory then owned but would have prevented the re-
newa of the controversy in regard TO any territory that
might hereafter be acquired either upon the north or south
of it. HepGa it will be perceived that those who defeated
the extension and observance Of the Missouri line
sponsibe for all the aaons and consequences which fol-
lowed the defeat of the Sepates proposition 1t was not
only rejected in the House OF Representatives, as have
stated by nOrthern votes in August l84s, but an ap-
peal Immediately taken TO the country IN the
presidential election which then pending There were
three candidates in the field with and enthusiastic
supporters in all the free States Martin Van Buren, was
the candidate of the aboonsts and free-soiler NOM
mated at Buffalo and standing on the Buffalo plat
form That platform declared if my memory serves me
right first that Congress possessed the constitutional
power abolish and prohibit slavery everywhere in the
Territories of the United States and second that they
the ee-soiers and abotonsts would abolish and pro-
hib slavery wherever they had the constitutional power
not only in all the Territories OF the United States but in the
District of Columbia and IL the dock-yards forts and
arsepas aId all other places in the States the jurisdiction
over which had been ceded to the United States Thus IT
appears that every freesoler and every abotonss IN
America by his vote for Mr. Van Buren, stood pledged to
abolish and prohibit slavery everywhere in the Terrific
ries of the United States. suppose that everywhere
meant south as well as north Of 3S deg 80 min and if
desire to inquire have inquired in all my speeches
delivered in the presence of the aboonists whether they
not pledged to blot out the line of SO deg 80 min
the Missouri Compromise line it called, the
dividing line between free territory and slave territory or
as the fashionable language of the day the barrier
Of freedom against slavery Applause.
And if they were thus pledged under their solemn ob
cations TO their God and their country desire to in
quire whether the fcsocrs and aboltonists did then
really consider the Missouri line to be solemn and nvio
liable compact binding in honor between all conscientious
men, the breach Of which would involve national disgrace
and moral urptude the part of those who should
pose its violation? If the repeal of the Missouri Compro
mise WAS an act OF infamy and treachery is pre-
tended what to think of those who, six years ago
originated the scheme and compelled its contamination b
dprving those Of who desired to be faithful TO it of the
power OF carrying out? Sc far as the point of repeal
concerned the only difference between and the abo
tonists aud reesoers is that they tried DO 1t in s4S
aud failed and tried in and succeeded Great
laughter and applause They think that by their efforts
they were aborng in the of humanity, their God
and THAR country while in doing that which they at,
tempted unsuccessfuy have performed act of infamy
and treason Its to this view of the subject TO
say that they proposed its repeal for the purpose of pohb
iting slavery both Sides for il sacred compact
binding in honor and conscience upon tie North and South
and upon the federal government and upon all the ci
of the respective States they had right TO
violate it or impair its obligations for purpose than for
another The motive Of the repeal therefore cannot justify
the turptude of the transaction provided solemn
and involable compact viii the aboliiionis and free
soers then persist in the charge that to propose repeal
violation Of the Missouri Compromise act of in
fanny
Lest the aboonsts ns, lake exception to this line of
argument propose to place them in company Of whose
associations they not at liberty under existing
stances, to complain | believe whig friends in ,s4s
nominated General Taylor their candidate for the presi
dency When they held their conventions in each of the
free States OF the Union to nominate candidates for the
presidential electors and and congressman and
other officers they passed resolutions favor of the
hibton Of slavery throughout all the Territories of
United States. suppose that ail the Territories
those south well north of SO deg 80 min Ii they
pledged well the abotonists and ee-soiers
blot out the line and prohibit slavery the south side Of
IT. Did they consider that line sacred compact the
ahrogaon Of which involved dishonor and perdy? II So
ii remains for them 20 explain how il that they for the
sake OF elecng their leader TO the presidency and
ing themselves OF the patronage the government
emoumens of office pledged Themselves In the face of God
and man to do that which they pronounce be Of
infsmy and treason. Loud applause.
This being the position of the wings the free-soers aud
the ahoonists let how the democratic party
on that occasion. General Cass candidate in
ls4s. lie had just written letter which is familiar the
country the Nicholson letter In it he had declared that
Congress possessed constitutional power to egsate ppon
the subject OF slavery in the Territories of the United States
and hence that the Missouri Compromise unconstu-
tona and void and in lien OF it, he proposed that the
people Of the Territories aud OF the States be form
I'd therein should be left entirely free form and regulate
their domestic institutions in their way subject
other limitation than that imposed by the constitution OF
e United States Was not this the position occupied by
The deaaocratc party in that contest? [Cheers We all
that Il Thus appears from this brief review
that in ls4s all parties aud fragments and segments Of par
lies in the free States agreed upon this pontto wit that
The Missouri line prohibiting slavery tie side and o