Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-03-19

implicitly to sanction on another. i do not
! like an act of that description under this gov
ernment. have not been sent here to have
my principles bounded by parallel Of latitude.
have not been sent here to look only at one
section of the country, where this institution
does not prevail and to close my eyes TO the
other section of the country where it docs pre-
| vail, and where 1t did prevail when our fathers
united in setting up this common government
have not been sent here to represent faction
of this great country, to close my eyes to its
broad expanse, and to shut them against its
future destiny. stand here, sir, as an Ameri-
can senator: and, without fear or favor, with
out regard to anything but my constitutional
duty, i propose to act upon this subject and
every subject, with a strict regard to the equal
rights OF every portion of our common country.
| Now, sir, if you look at the act, if you look
at the record of the act, you will find no com
pact there butyou will find on act of ordinary
legislation, accompanied by an understanding.
Gentlemen from the north md gentlemen from
the south in Congress, in this or the other
| branch ut that time, came to an understanding
that they would endeavor in future legislation,
to adhere TO q division of this kind. do not
like that division, nor any other division of ter
ritory under this government except division
into States where the Constitution has drawn
the line. Now, if there was that understand
ing, 1t is not compact binding on the present
Congress; it does not partake of the nature OF
n compact; and if you look into the history OF
that period, Mr.. President, you will find that
even at that day it was not regarded as n bind.
ing compact, or rs an honorable compact, al
though, to u certain extent, there was this un-
derstanding. The very next year after this act
was passed, when Missouri presented herself
for admission into the Union, precisely in con-
forty with its terms, almost the whole Of the
north voted against her admission. If there
| was compact, here was an attempt to impose
new terms. l refer to it, as showing that the
statesmen who were upon the stage at that day,
did not look upon it in that light
| Well, sir, as you come down to lS47, you
lind that there was a motion made in the
House of Representatives, on the 18th of July,
1917, by Mr.. Burt, Of South Carolina, to amend
the Oregon bill, by inserting the words "inas-
much as the whole Of said territory lies north
of $50 30> north latitude, known rs the Mis-
souri, compromise line,' as reason for intro
ducing clause into that bill prohibiting sla-
very, and it was voted down by vote Of ll3
to S2-the | ID being principally northern men,
4 and the 81 principally southern men. 1t was
upon the Oregon bill it was upon part Of the
territory that was embraced within the Lousi.
ana purchase; and even then the north would
not admit that it should be assigned simply as
. reason, and they utterly repudiated it even
as reason, when the very restriction that was
introduced into that very bill was itself founded
on the Missouri restriction.
i Again, when in the Senate similar amend
ment was adopted-presented, believe, by the
honorable senator from Illinois. Mr. DouG.
LAS undertaking to continue that line to the
Pacific, and il went to the other house, the
south voted TO concur; but the north went
against 1t, and it was again repudiated. Then
sir, the question came before the President up
on the bill containing simply that restriction
and it was presented to that pure and upright
patriot, In whose time events occurred which
must forever render him and his administration
illustrious. speak what ! know when ! say
that no question was presented to President
Polk which embarrassed him so much as the
question that arose upon the Oregon bill. On
the one hand was the unconstitutional nature
OF that restriction, and on the other was this
understanding, that then it had not been utterly
repudiated, and which the south believed should
| carry that compromise line to the Pacific ocean.
And for the purpose OF preserving that line,
and not even seeming to disturb it, that bill
4 IL,
used the language which was reae by the hon
orable senator from Delaware, Mr.. CLAYTON
He said:
: 1t was upon these considerations that, nj the
close Of your last session, gave my sanction TO
the principle Of the Missouri compromise line by
approving and signing the bill establish the ter
ritorial government of Oregon From sincere
desire to preserve the harmony of the Union. and
in Difference 10 the acts OF my predecessors. felt
constrained 10 yield my acquescence, 10 the ex-
| tent 10 which they had gone, in compromising this
! delicate and dangerous question. But if Con-
| gress shall now reverse the decision by which
| the Missouri compromise was elie cted, and shall
! propose to extend the restriction over the whole
territory. south well as north Of the parallel Of
800 30', it will cease TO be compromise. and
must be regarded as an original question:
Now, sir, here is declaration by the Chief
Executive Magistrate Of the American people,
In this deliberate act he gave notice to the
country that if now, having in Oregon carried
out this compromise line, it was not adhered
to, it would then be an open question, as if no
line had ever been adopted. WE'LL sir need
60 into detail here to show the various acts by
which the south endeavored to maintain that
line-by which the north endeavored tossub
vert it, and to depart from it? They are al
ready before the country. One political party,
the third party, of which we have heard, always
repudated this line. They contended that the
power to meet and to resist slavery and to call
in aid the authority of this common govern
ment in the Territories everywhere, south as
well as north of that line, always existed, and
ought to be exercised. | pass from this period
of intervention, and come to new period-that
of the compromise measures of 1850, when
we returned to the early policy Of the country
which had prevailed from the date of the
Constitution to the date of the restriction.
The honorable senator from Massachusetts,
Mr. EVERETT, distinguished alike for his
ability and for his courtesy, was not able
to discover in the compromise measures
of 1850 any such principle as that of non-in-
tervention. Why, sir, the principle of non
Intervention is stamped upon them in charac.
tiers so distinct and luminous that | am utterly
at loss to discover how we should differ on
the subject.
The Missouri restriction was direct interior
ence; the legislation of 1850 is exactly non