Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-02-18
SALEM coLUNBIANA COUNTY SATURDAY FEBRUARY
That question was left ontircl,

State governments That question was left entirely
I to judicial decision.
Well sir, what did the committee propose to do
with the Nebraska Territory2 In respect to that,
rs in respect to the Mexican Territory, difference
OF opinion exists in relation to the Introduction of
slaves. There are southern gentlemen who con
tend tha notwithstanding the Missouri prohibition,
they can take their slaves into the Territory covered
by it, and hold them there by virtue of the Const-
tuition. On the other hand, the great majority of
the American people, North and South, believed
the Missouri prohibition to be constitutional and
, e1ectual. Now what did tho committee propose /?
Did tnJy propose to repeal the prohibition? Did
f they suggest ihat II had been superscdod2 Did
they advance any idea Vf that kind No, sir. This
is their language:
Under this section, as in tie case Of the Mexi.
: can law IN New Mexico and Utah, it is disputed
folnt whether slavery is prohibited in the Nebraska
country by valid enactment. The decision of this
question involves the constitutional power of Con-
gress to pass laws prescribing aud regulating the
domestic institutions Of the various Territories OF
the Union. In the opinion Of those eminent states
VINO hold that Congress is invested with rightfu
authority to legisate upon the subject of slavery in
the Territories the eighth section Of the net pre-
paratory to the admission Of Missouri is null and
VOID, while the prevailing sentiment in large por
ton OF the Union sustans the doctrine that tho
\ Constitution of the United States secures to every
citizen an inaonable right to move into any Of the
territories with his property, Of whatever kind and
description, and to hold and enjoy the same under
the sanction uf law. Your committee do not feel
themselves called upon to enter into the discussion
Of these controvcrtcd questions They involve .he
same grave issues which produced the agitation,
thc sectional strife, and tho fearful struggle of
4 1850"
\ This language will bear repetition:
Il Your committee do not feel themselves called
upon to enter into the discussion Of these contro
yerted questions, They involve the same grave
issues which produced the agitation, the sectional
strife, and tho fearful 81 of IShOU
u And they 90 on to says
Congress deemed it wise and prudent to refrain
from deciding the matters in controversy then,
either by affirming or repeating the Moxi:an laws,
or 10y an act dcclaratory Of the real intent of the
Constitution and the extent Of the protection ai-
iorded by 1t TO slave property in The Territories;
50 your committee are not prepared now to recon-
mend departure from the course pursued ON that
memorable occasion, either by affirming repeal
ing the eighth section of the Missouri net or hy
any act dccaratory Of the meaning Of the Consti
tuition in resnect TO the legal points in dispute"
Mr. President, here very remarkable facts
The Committee ON Territories declared that it
not wise, that it was not prudent, that il was not
right, TO renew the old controversy and to rouse
agitation. They declared that they would abstain
from any recommendation Of repeal Of the pro-
T rbtion, or of any provision declaratory of the
construction of the Constitution in respect to the
legal points in dispute.
n Mr.. President / am not one Of those WHO sup
posed that the question between Mexican law and
the slarc-holding claims was avoided in tho Utah
aud New Mexico act nor do think that the in
PRODUCTION into the Nebraska bill of the provisions
of those acts in respect to slavery would leave the
question between the Missouri prohibition and the
same slave-holdng claim entirely unaffected. am
OF very different opinion. But am dealing now
with the report Of the committee, and show, be-
yond all controversy, that that report gives no
cOuntenance whatever to the doctrine Of repeal by
+ supersedure.
Well, sir, the bill reported by the committee
printed in the Washington Sentinel on Saturday,
January I. 1t contained twenty sections; no
more, no less. 1t contained no provisions in
spect to slavery, except those in the Utah and New
Mexico bills. II left those provisions to speak for
themselves This was in harmony with the report
, OF the committee. On the 10th Of January-on
Iuesday-the act appeared again in the Sentinel
but 1t had grown longer during the interval. IL
appeared now with twenty-ono sections, There
was statement in the paper that the twcniy-Rrst
section had been omitted by clerical error.
But, sir, it is singular fact that this twenty
I first section is entirely out Of harmony with the
I committees report. 1t undertakes TO determine
i the effect of the provision in the Utah and Now
, Mexico bills 1t declares, among other things,
that all questions pertaining to slavery in the Ter
: ritOries, and in the States to be formed there
, from, are to be left to the decision of the people
residing therein, though their appropriate repre-
sentatyes. This provision, in effect, repealed the
Missouri prohibition, which the committee, in their
+ report declared oughtnot to be done. Is it poss
+ BILE, sir, that this was mere clerical error May
it not be that this twcntyfrst section the fruit
: Of some Sunday work, between Saturday the 7th,
G and Tuesday the 10Th?
. But, sir, the addition Of this section, il seems
n did not help the bill 1t did not suppose, meet
f the appreciation Of southern gentlemen, who con-
tend that they have right TO take the slaves into
+ the Territories, Notwithstanding any prohibition,
: either by Congress or by Territorial Legislature
dare say it was found that the votes Of these gem
emen could not be had for the bill with that clause
c in it. 1t was not enough that the committee had
( abandoned their report and added this twenty
first section in direct contraycntion of its
ings and principles. The twenty-frst section itself
r must be abandoned, and the repeal of the Missouri
y prohibition placed in shape which would not deny
\ the slave holding claim.
1 The Senator from Kentucky, Mr.. Dixon on
G the 10Th january, submitted an amendment which
came square mp TO repeal, and to the claim That
ll amendment, probably, produced some Tutoring
l. and some consultation. ID met the views Of south
3 crn Senators, and probably determined the shape
Il which the bill has finally assumed. or the various
Il mutations which it has undergone, can hardly be
mistaken in atributing the last to the amendment
e of the Senator from Kentuck". That there is no
r effect without cause, is among earliest lessons
n in physical philosophy and know Of no cause,
3 which will account for the remarkable changes
Is which the bill underwent after the 10th ofJanuary,
other than that amendment, and the determination
= of southern Senators to support it, and to vote
" against any provision recognizing the right of any
Territorial Legislature prohibit the introduction
!, of Slavery.
,f Il was just seven days, Mr. President, after the
% Senator from Kentucky had offered his amend
= = ment that fresh amendment reported from
= the Committee on Territories, in the shape Of a
- new bill enlarged TO forty sections The new bill
- cuts off from the proposed Territory holfa degree
y of latitude ON tho south, and divides the residue
- into two Territories--thc southern Territory OF
n Kansas, and the northern Territory of Nebraska
N acn n
and New Mexico bills; trejects entirely the twenty
- first cericalerror section, and abrOgates the Mis-
n souri, prohibition by the very singular prohibition
4. which will read
Of "The Constitution and all laws of the United
8, States which are not locally napplicable, shall