The Ohio star. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1830-1854, 1854-03-01
RAVENNA, WEDNESDAY MARCH l, 1851.

leo 0lilS. It QeCi0f6u oatiOI
questions pertaining Slavery in the Territories,
and in the new States to be formed therefrom,
were to be left to the decision of the people resi-
ding therein, through the appropriate representa-
tives This provision, in effect, repealed the Mis-
souri, prohibition. which the committee; in their re-
port, declared ought not to be done. Is it possi-
ble SIR that this was mere clerical error! May |
it not be that this twenty first section the fruit
of some ,Sunduy s0o,k, between Saturday the 7.h |
and Tuesday the 1othl
But, sir, the addition Of this sectiont seems, did
not help the bill. 1t did not, l suppose meet the
appreciation of southern gentlemen, who contend
that they have right to take slaves into the terri
tories, notwithstanding any prohibition. either by
Congress or by a Territorial Legislature dare
say it was found that the votes of these gentlemen
could not be had for the bI without that clause 10
it. 1t was not enough that the committee had
abandoned their report, end added this twenty
first section in direct contravention Of its
ings and principles. The twenty first section it
self must be abandoned. and the repeal of the
Missouri prohibition placed in shape which
would not deny the slavehoding claim.
She Senator from Kentucky, MIR. Dixon on
the l6h Of January, submitted an amendment
which cane square up to repeal, aud to the claim.
That amendment probably, produced some fiut-
tering and some consultation. 1t met the views
Of Southern Senators, and probably determined
the shape which the bill has finally assumed OF
the various mutations which the bill has under
gone can hardly be mistaken in attribuing the
last to the amendment of the Senator from Ken
TN ~.
is among our earliest lessons in physical philoso-
ply, and | know of no cause which will account
for the remarkable changes which the bill under
went after the 10Th of January, other than that
amendment, and the determination of Southern
Senators 10 support it, and vote against any pro-
vision recognzingihe right of any Territorial Leg
islature to prohibit the introduction of Slavery.
1t was just seven days. Mr.. President, after the
Senator from Kentucky had offered his amend
ment, that fresh amendment was reported from
the Committee Territories, in the shape of a
new bill, enlarged to forty sections. This new
bill cuts off from the proposed Territory half de-
gree of latitude on the SOUTH and divides the resi-
due into two Territories-the southern Territory
of Kansas, and the Northern Territory of Nebras-
ka. 1t applies to each ali the provisions of the
Utah and New Mexico bills it rejects entirely the
twenty first clerical errcr section, and abrogates
the Missouri prohibition by the very singular pro-
hibiton which will read:
! The Constitution and all laws Of the United
States which are not locally inapplicable, shall
have the same force and effect within the sait
Territory Of Nebraska as elsewhere within the
i United States, except the eighth section of the
act preparatory to the admission of Missouri intt
the Union. approved March 6, 500, np.ich IRA
superseded by the principles Of the legislation o
1885, commonly cated the Compromise Measures
and is THEREFORE, declared inopsrdti0e.
Doub less, Mr. President, this provision ope
rates as repeal of the prohibition. The Senate
from Kentucky was right when he said it ii
effect the equivalent of his amendment. Thos
who are willing to break and destroy The old com
pact of 1e20 can vote for this bill with full assur
, ance that such will be its effect But appeal t
them not to vote for this supersedure clause
ask them not to incorporate into the legislation
the country declaration which every one know
TO be wholly untrue. have said that this doctrin
of supersedure is new. have now proved that
is plant of but ten days growth. 1t was neVe
3 seen or heard of until the 23i day of January
1854. 1t was upon that day that this tree of Upa
was planted: we already see its poison fruits.
The provision have quoted abrogates the Mi:
: souri, prohibition. 1t asserts light in the Tel
ritorial Legislature TO prohibit Slavery. The Ser
Il ator from Illinois, in his speech, was very earef
to assert no right of legislation in q Territori
Legislature, except subject to the restrictions ar
i limitations of the Constitution. We know we
y enough what the understanding or calm of Soul
n ern gentlemen is in respect TO these Limitation
If and restrictions. They insist that by them ever
q Territorial Legislature is absolutely preclude
;; from all power of legislation for the prohibition
Slavery. warn gentlemen who propose to su
port this bill, that their votes for this provision
/ be regarded as admitting this claim. 4,
II have thus given a brief account of the nut
u tons which this bill has under. have show
10 the origin and duration of tho pretenee that Il
Missouri prohibition is superseded by the legisl
8. ton of 1850. l now appeal TO the Senators wi
it sit around me. and who with me participated
the discussions of 1850 1 ask them to say whet
TO er any one of them imagined then, or belev
Id now, that the Missouri prohibition was suppressed
by the legislation of that year. Here, sir, sits t
1e Senator from Virginia. Mr. Mason will he 8
le that any fine before the 23d of January. 1s5
he ever heard such proposition stated or mai
D. taiaed anywhere. by anybody? No, sir, he W
ne not say it. There is no evidence that the asst
al ton was ever made before that day, when it ma
o. its appearance in the Senator's bill. 1t is I
of markabe circumstance, that 5000 copies of
be- committees report have been printed by the ord
be of the Senate, and l know not how many for
m dividual subscribers, and circulated through t
wv country, and sustaining the bill upon the grou
e- that the Missouri prohibition is neither repeal
,rt nor affirned-whe the bill itself as now amend
NJ expressly abrogates that prohibition. The rep'
,r- as circulated condemns the bill amended, a
the bill as amended contradicts the report as C
90 culated. All this must necessarily mislead a
,r. confuse the public judgment .-
ms; have now poved that the doctrine of super
i, dure is n novelty. I will proceed TO prove that