The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-03-02
NO. 374.

Delaware, Samuel Smith, of Maryland
William LOwndes, of South Carolina,
and Charles Fenton Mercer, of Virginia.
The title of the Missouri bill was amend
ed in conformity with this prohibition,
by adding the words, "and to prohibit
Slavery in sertain Territories" The bills
then passed both Houses without d.
vision and on the morning of the Sd
March, 1920, the National hpteligencer
contained an exulting article, entitled:
"The Question Settled"
Another paper, published in Baltimore,
Immediately after the passage of the Com
promise, vindicated it as perpetual COM
pact, which could not be disturbed. The
language is so clear and strong that will
read it, although it has been already quoted
by my able and most excellent friend from
Ohio, Mr.. CHAsE:l
" 1T IS true the Compromise is supported only
by the letter Of the lar repealable by the authority
tglich enacted it; but the circumstances of the
case give thus taU a MORAL FORCE equal TO that
Of a positive precision Of the Constitution; and
zoe do not hazard anything By saying that the
Consultation erists in its observance. Both par
ties have sacrificed much to Cancellation. We
,cish to see the COMPACT kept in good faith and
we trust that kind Providence will open the
way TO relieve us OF an evil which every good
citizen deprecates as the supreme curse of the
country. "-.Niles's Register.
Sir, the distinguished leaders in this set
Element were all from the South. AS early
as February, 1919, Louis McLane, of Della
ware, had urged it upon Congress, "by
some compact binding upon all subsequent
legislatures" 1t was in 1920 brought for
ward and upheld in the Senate by WILLIAM
PINkNEY, Of Maryland and passed in that
body by the vote of every Southern SEN
ator except two, against the vote of every
Northern Senator except four. 1t was well
coined in the House by Samuel Smith, of
Maryland. The Committee of Conference,
through which it finally prevailed, was fill
ed, on the part of the Senate, with infiexi-
BILE partsans of the South, such as might
fifty represent the sentiments of its Pres
ident pro tenn, John Gaillard a Senator
from South Carolina on the part of the
House, it was nominated by HENRY CLAY,
the Speaker, and Representative from Ken
lucky. This committee, thus constituted,
drawing its double life from the South, was
A private letter from Mr.. PINKNEY, written
at the time, and preserved by his distin-
guished biographer, shows that the report
made by the committee came from him.
"The bill for the admission of Missouri into
the Union (,cithOtd restriction as to Slavery
may be considered as past. That bill was sent
back again this morning from the House, nth
the restriction as TO Slavery. The Senate voted
to amend it by striking out the restriction, CT
TO l5,) and proposed, as another amendment,
,ghat hare all along been the advocate Of, re-
striction upon the Uacant territory TO the north
aud ,cest, as to Slavery Tonight the House
of Representatives have agreed to both OF these
amendments, in opposition TO their former votes,
and this affair is settled. Tomorrow we shall
(of course) recede from our amendments as to
Maine, (our object being effected,) and both
States will be admitted. Thu, happy result has
been accomplished by the Conference, Of tUhich
,vas a member on the part Of the Senate, and Of
,Dhich / proposed the report rhich has been
made"
Thus again the Compromise takes its
life from the South. Proposed in the COM
mittee by Mr.. PINKNEY, it was urged on the
House Of Representatives, with great ear
nestness, by Mr.. Lowndes, of South Caro-
lima, and Mr.. Mercer, OfVirginia; and here
again is the most persuasive voice of the
South. When passed by Congress, it next
came before the President, James Monroe,
of Virginia, for his approval, who did not
sign it till after the unanimous opinion of
his Cabinet, in writing, composed Of John
Quincy Adams, William H. Crawford,
Smith Thompson, John G. Calhoun, and
William Wirt-a majority Of whom were
Southern men-that the prohibition of
Slavery in the Territories was constitu-
tional. Thus yet again the Compromise
takes its life from the South.
As the Compromise took its life from
the South, so the South, in the judgment
of its own statesmen at the time, and
according to unquestionable facts, was
the conquering party. 1t gained forth
with its darling desire, the first and essen
tial stage in the admission of Missouri as a
slave State, consummated at the next ses-
sion of Congress and subsequently the
admission Of Arkansas, also as a slave
State. From the crushed and humbled
North, it received more than the full con-
sideration stipulated in its favor. On the
side of the North the contract has been
more than executed. And now the South
refuses to perform the part which 1t orr
ginaly proposed and assumed in this trans
action. With the consideration in its
pocket, it repudiates the bargain which it
forced upon the country. This, sir, is a
simple statement of the present question.
A subtle German has declared, that he
could find heresies in the Lords Prayer
and believe it is only in this spirit that
any flaw can be found in the existing obi
cations of this compact. As late as 1S48
in the discussions Of this body, the Sen
ator from Virginia, who sits behind me,
[Mr. MASON, while condemning it in
many aspects, says:
"Yet as il was agreed TO as a Compromise
by the South for the sake of the Union, ,couLd
be the last to disturb H. Congressional Globe,
Apperdir, LIST session, 30th Congress, Vol. 10, p.
Even this distinguished Senator recog-
missed it as an obligation which he would
not disturb. And, though disbelieving
the original constitutionalitv of the ar
rangement, he was clearly right. know,
sir, that it is in form simply Legislative
act; but as the Act of Settlement in Eng
land, declaring the rights and Liberties of
the subject and settling the succession of
the Crown, has become permanent part
of the British Constitution, irrepealabe by
any common legislation, so thi. act, under
all the circumstancesattendin its passage,
also by long acquiescence and the COM
plete performance of its conditions by Ole
party, has become part of our fundamen-
tai law, irrePealable by any common legis-
lation. As well might Congress, at this
n,op,aut updortaLo g. ~LS.I II