The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1854-03-08

nial, as shall the statements here which are over
his own signature, as a bass falsehool and prove
1t BY the solemn Legislation Of this country
Mr.. CHASE. / cali the Senator to order.
The PRESIDENT. The Senator from Illinois Is GER
tainly out of order
Mr.. DoUGLss Then will only say that shall
eontne myself to this document and owe its state
ments TO be false by the legislation of the country
Certainly that is in order.
Mr.. CHASE. You cannot do it.
Mr.. DoUGLAs The Argument Of this manifesto Is
predlcated upon the assumption that the policy Of the
fathers OF the Republic was to prohibit slavery in
all the territory ceded by old Stutes to the Union
and made United States territory. for the purpose
OF being organized into new States. | take issue
upon that statement Such was not the practice in
the early history fthe Government. tis true that
IN the territory northwest Of the Ohio river slave
ry was prohibited by the ordinance OF 7S7 but tits
also true that in the terrtery south of the Ohio ver
TO W.T. the Territory OF Tennessee, slavery was per-
mied and prOtected and it is also true, that in the
organization VI the Territory Of Mississippi, in 1873,
the provisions of the ordinance of 1887 applied
to it, with the exception OF the sixth article which
prohibited slavery. Then, sir, You hnd upon the
statuteb books under Washington and the early Pres
idents provisions of law showing that in the south
western territories the right 10 ho.d slaves WAS
clearly implied or recognized, while in the norh-
west territories it prohibited. The only con-
clussn that can be fairly and honestly drawn from
that legislation is that 1t the policy of the faith
ton between free territories and slaveholdng ter
ritories by natural or a geographical line, being
sure to make that line correspond, as might
be, to the laws of climate, OF production and prob
ably ofall those other that would control the
and it either deara BILE undesirable
to the people inhabting the respective territories.
Sir, | wish You to bear in mind, too,
that this geographical line, established BY
the founders of the republic between free
territories and slave territories, extended rs
far westward as our territory then reached;
the object being to avoid all agitation upon
the slavery question by settling that qnes-
ton forever, as far as our territory extern
ded, which was then to the Mississippi riv-
er.
Whom, in 1908, we acquired from France
the territory known as Louisiana, it became
necessary to lcgislate for the protection Of
the inhabitants residing therein. 1t will be
seen, by looking into the bill establishing
the territorial government in 1905 for the
territory of New Orleans, embracing tie
same country now Known as The State Of
Louisiana, that the ordinance of 1887 was
expressly extended to that territory, except.
ing the SIKH sect: y, which prohibited sa-
very. Then chat act implied that the ter
ritory of New Orleans was to be a slave
holding territory by making that exception
in the law But, sir, when they came to
form what WAS then called the territory OF
Missouri, north of the thirtythird parable,
they used different language. They did not
extend the ordinance OF 1887 TO It at ALL
They first provided that it should be gov
erned by laws made by the governor and
the Judges, and. when in 1919 Congress
rave 10 chat territory, under the name Of
the territory of Missouri, terriioral gov
eminent, the people were allowed to do as
they pleased upon the subject Of slavery,
subject only 10 the limitations oi the Con-
sttuion of the Uuiled States. Now what
is The inference from that legislation? That
was, by implication, recognized
south Of the thirty third parallel; and north
Of that the people were left to exercise their
cwn Judgment and TO do as hey pleased
IL oon the subject, without any implication
fo or against the existence OF the institu-
toA.
This continued to be the conditicn Of the
C, urtry in the Missouri Territory up 10 1890.
when the celebrated act which is now called
the Missouri compromise act was passed -
Slavery did not exist ln nor was it exclu
ded from the country now known as Nebras-
ka. There WAS no code Of laws upon the
subject OF slavery either way: FIRST, for
the reason that slavery had never been in
troduced into Louisiana, and established by
positive euactlnent II had grown upthere
by IL sort OF common law. and been sup
ported AM protected. When a common law
grows uE. when an institution becomes
established under usage, it carries il SO
far as that usage actually goes, and no
further. If it had been established by di-
rec. enactm mt, it might have carried it so
fai as the po itical jurisdiction extended; but,
be that as it may, by the act Of 1919, crea-
ting the Territory OF Missouri, that terri
tory was allowed to legislate upon the sub
ject of slavery rs it saw proper, subject only
to the limi,atiors, which j have stated; and
the country not inhabited or thrown open
to settlement wat set apart as Indian coun-
try, and rendered subject to Indian laws
Hence, the local Hesitation of the State oI
Missouri did not re achinto that Indian coun-
try, but was excluded from it by the Indian
code and Indian laws. The municipal reg
ulations of Missouri could not go there until
the Indian title had leen extinguished, and
the country through open 10 settlenaent.---
Such being the case, she only Legislation in
exislencein Nebraska Territory at the time
that the Missouri act rassed. namely, the
9Th OF March, 1890, was a provision, in
effect, that the people sh ould be allowed te
do as they pleased upon the subject Of sla.
very. oa aa #
The Territory of Miss, uri having beer
left in that legal condition, positive oppcsi
tion was made TO the bill to organize a State
government. with view ~ its admission
into the Union; and senator FROM my State
Mr.. Jesse B Thomas, introduced an amend
msnt, known as the eighth section Of thu
bilh In which 1t was provided that slavery
should be prohibited, north OF sG deg 81
min. north latitude, in that country which
we had acquired from France. What wa
the object oflhe enactment of that eight
section? Was It moi to 20 back TO the ori
ginal policy Of prescribing boundaries to;h'
limitation Of free institutions, and &c slay,
institutions, by geographical line in orde
10 avoid all controversy in Congress upol
the subject? Hence they extended hat ge
ographIcal line throagh all the tarritor,
purchased from France, which was as tar a
our possessions then reached. 1t WIS. nc
simply to settle the question on that pisc,
Of country, butit was TO carry out grea
principle. BY extending that dividing lin
as far west as our territory went, and un
ming II onward to each new acquisition o