Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-03-18


compromise and all geographical and Territorial lines
Here is first direct and positive allegation OF fact
that was he intent Of the measures OF loooto super
sede the Missouri compromise and seeona' IN
declared that such is their illegal effect .
deny utterly the fact and conroyert, with equal
positiveness the soundness of the opinion. WIN not
stop inquire why the honorable chairman
with the subjects at ALL if bis allegations are ue out
choose to meet the issue at once, and fat-fosted
What Mr. President, the measures Of 1850?
They we're to admit California (2) to adjust theds
puted boundary with Texas; @ to abrogate the slave
trade in the District of Columbia a. to amend our laws
for the return of ges from labor so as to make them
more effective and finally to provide Territorial Govern
ments for Utah and New Mexico It is not pretended
that any of these measures, other than those last ind
Gated have the slightest bearing this subject We will
inquire, then, whether there is any incompatibity be-
tween the acts organizing Utah and New Mexico and
legislation for the Nebraska and Kansas leaving the 9th
section of the act of 1920 in force.
would observe, in the first place. that there is moth
ing in either of the acts first mentioned the subject OF
slavery, except the following clause:
"And prorided further, That when admitted rs State the
said Territory any portion of the shall be received
into the Union with without slavery their constitution
may prescribe at the time Of their admission"
We do not propose that you should in express
TERMS the restrictions Of 1920 but willing to vote for
BILL far this objection is concerned, in precise
conformity with the provisions of that which passed the
House at the last session, in other words for bill
which says nothing of slavery way the other The
only difference between such bill and the Utah and New
Mexico acts would consist in the fact that the clause above
reeted appears in the former and would not appear in
the latter Be it remembered that the 9th section of the
act Of 1920 provides no rule for the admission of States
into the Union which might be formed out of the terri
tory lying north Of S6 3 but simply provides that from
such territory slavery and involuntary servtude other
wise than in crimes whereof the parties shall
have been duly convicted shall be and hereby forever
prohibited" Notwithstanding the word g forever is
used apprehend that the eth section applies only to
the country during its Territorial existence and should
State present itself for admission, with constitution
toeratng slavery could receive it into the great
tiona family without violating that section. How, then
can the clause which have recited from the Utah and
New Mexico acts be considered incompatible with egs
laon for Nebraska and Kansas, which is silent on the
subject Of slavery which, in other words leaves those
Territories subject the restrictions of 1890? is d
cult how State which applies for admission can
be excluded though her constitution toerates slavery,
and though she be formed out Of territory made free by
the act of 1920. Any State free so amend its
constitution to introduce slavery it it peases and IT IS
obvious that the people Of the States whether already in
or about to come in must decide this troublesome ques
tion for themselves What then does the clause in the
acts organizing governments for Utah and New Mexico
amount to after oil? Fortunately are not without
some light upon this subject Mr. Webster voted in IA
yor of that clause when proposed amendment by
late Senator from Louisiana, (Mr. Soule but he OBJ
served do not see much practical utility in this amend
ment" And further, the honorable chairman himself,
in his speech at Chicago, October 23 1850 took even
stronger ground
"The bills" said he, establishing Territorial Govern
for Utah and New Mexico silent the subject
slavery except the provision that when they should be
admitted into the Union States each should decide the
question slavery ITSELF This latter provision not
eorporated in original bills for the reason that concev-
ed it involve principle clearly deducble from the
stuon that to embody it in the form OF
legal enactment But when it offered amendment
to the bills cheeruly voted for it, lest its rejection should
be deemed denial of the principle asserted in it."
So that Mr. Webster could Every little Of practical
utility" in the clause and the honorable chairman
utility whatever. The legislation of 1860 then, in
effect silent the subject of slavery Why you not
be silent now? And how can any one assert that it was
the intent well as the legal effect OF the compromises
Of 1850 to supersede the Missouri compromise? You
organize Territorial Governments for certain countries
and you do not deem it expedient to prohibit the intro
ducton Of slavery What has that to do with countries
many hundred miles off, where the circumstances may be,
and are in fact, entirely different? .-~
In the next place. would observe that the system Of
measures adopted in 1850 were intended to comprise
all the known subjects Of controversy between the differ
emit sections Of the Union to put end to the
slavery question forever; they were to be fnaiy
they intended to redress all existing grievances,
and the Missouri restriction grievance in 1850 if it
be now. That measures comprehending every cause
of disscnson difficulty really intended appears
from what Mr. Clay said in his opening speech delivered
in the Senate the 9th Of February, rs follows:
"When to consider this subject there were two
three general purposes which seemed to most de-
sirable if possible to accomplish The was to set
tie all the controyerted questions arising out of the SUBJ
'ect of slavery and it seemed to me to be doing very
little if settle question and left other disturbing
Questions unadusted. 1t seemed to me but doing but
little stopped but one leak in the ship Of state and
let other leaks capable OF producing danger not de-
strucon the vessel therefore turned my attention
to every subject connected with the institution Of slave
ry and Of which controverted have sprung
to if it possible practicable to accommodate
and adjust the whole Of them. He frequently address
ed the Senate the Importance nay the necessity, Of
comprehensive and final measures Of reconciliation
He often specified all the known Of irritation
and on one occasion he spoke of them "fve gaping
wounds" meaning only the matters already alluded to-
In instance did he speak Of the Missouri restriction
wound cause of irritation did he dream of set
ting it aside. In instance did any other member sug
gest propose the overthrow of that restriction Nothing
is to be found in the reports submitted to the Senate
House to that eect nothing in the speeches of honor
able members nothing in the resolutions acts Of
State Legislatures; and nothing in the suggestions Of
final Adjustment the harmony of the country be
restored and every possible occasion for the rentroduc
ton Of these irritating topics into Congress to be
moved AL this attempted, and was supposed to
have been accomplished The country rejoiced accord
ngy and the authors Of this happy consummation
regarded by immense majority of the American peo-
pie as public benefactors. The unversatJ of the ad-
justmcn recognised by President Fillmore in his
nual message cd session Of the 3st Congress- in these
words:
"Tbe series of measures to which have alluded are
garded by settlement, in substance and principle
final settlement Of the dangerous and exciting subjects which
they embrace"
venture to assert also that the honorable chairman
(dr DoUaLAs himself took exactly the view of the
subject for he observed, in speech delivered in this
chamber the 23d of December, 1850:
at wish to state that have determined make
another speech the slavery question And will add
the hope that the necessity for 1t will exist
heartily tired of the controversy"