The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-02-16
WASHINGTON, THURSDAY.

have introduced no question of Territorial Sla-
very into COngress-not we who are lenonncea
as agitators and factionists No. sir: the ouiet.
lists and the fnalists have become cgitators
they who told us that all agitation was ouieted
and that the resolutions at the political con.
ventions have put final period to the discus.
sion of Slavery
This will not escape the observation of the
country, 1t is Slavery that renews the strife.
IL 10 SaaIery that again wants room 1t is Sla-
very, mn ats insatiate demands for more slave
tert,eafy end more slave States
'tEt t1ns&4aat does Slavery ask for nowa Why.
Fsff demands that q time honored and sacred
compact shall be reseinded--a compact which
has endured through a whole generation-a
compact that has been universally REGARDED as
Invsolabie, North and South---a COMPACT. the
itutiona!ity of which few have doubted
and by which all have consented 10 abide.
n will got answer to violate such a comnaet
( dioutl IA pretext ( Soqle plausible, ground
7sshst hey isceseredfs ina Ented for sud- an act
ana sren ground is supposed to be found in
siie doctrine which was advanced the other fay
by the Senator from Illinois, that the Comuro-
mise act OF 1880 superseded the prohibition
ei slavery north of SO deg 80 min, in the act
preparatory Tor the admission Of Mi, souri,. Ay.
Sir, "snpei seded" is the phrase-'' superseded
by the principles of the legislation of 1850
commonly called the Compromise Measures
1t Is against this statement. untrue in fact
and without foundation in history. that the
amendment which have proposed Is directed
SIR this is novel idea At the time when
these measures were before Congress in 1850.
when the questions involved i'm them were dis.
eussed from day to day, from week to week.
and from month to month, in this Senate
Chamber, who ever heard that the Missouri
prohibition was to DO superseded? What
man, at what time in what speech, ever sug-
gested the idea that the acts of that wear
were to affect the Missouri Compromise? The
Senator from Illinois the other day invoked
the authority of Henry Clay that departed
statesman, in respect to whom, whatever NAV
be the differences of political opinion, none
question that, among the great men of this
country, he stood proudly eminent. Did he
In the report made by him as chairman of the
Committee of Thirteen, or in any speech in
support OF the Compromise acts, or in any con-
versation IN the committee or out of the com
mittee, ever even hint at this doctrine of ST.
persodure! Did any supporter OF any oppo-
nent OF the Compromise acts ever yindicate or
condemn upon the ground that the Missouri
prohibition would be affected by them? Vol,
Sir, the Compromise acts were passed They
were denounced North, and they were de-
nounced South. Did any defender Of them
at the South ever justify his support of them
upon the ground that the South had obtained
through them the repeal of the Missouri pro
hibiticn Did any objector to them at tho
North ever even suggest, as ground of con-
that that prohibition was swept
away by them No, sir No man, North or
South, during the whole Of the discussion of
those acts here or In that other discussion
which followed their enactment throughout
the country, ever intimated any such opinion.
Now, sir; let US come to the last session of
Congress. A Nebraska bill passed the House
and came to the Senate and was reported
from the Committee on Territories by the Sen
ator fom Illinois, IS its chairman Was there
ahy provision IN it which even tquintcd to-
vs,sSS pfiF ,sRRtep. q EeSe4at, l5 ~ iaYe,l
the Try S-osxld that Il leis tho Territoxy ud
der Tie operation Of the Missouri prohibition
The Senator from Illinois made a speech in
defence of it. Did he invoke Southern sup
port, upon the ground that it superseded the
Missouri prohibition Not at all Was it OBJ
posed or indicated by anybody On any such
ground Every Senator knows the contrary
The Senator from Missouri, Mr. Atehison,
now the President of this body, made speech
upon the bill, in which he distinctly declared
that the Missouri prohibition was not repeal
ed, and could not be repealed
will send this speech to the Secretary, and
ask him to read the paragraphs marked.
The Secretary read, az follows:
I" ! will now state to the Senate the views
which induced me to oppose this proposition in
the early part Of the session.
" had two objections to it. Oac was, that
the Indian title III that Territory had not been
tirguished, or, at least, very small portion
of it had been. Another was the Missouri
or, as it is commonly called the
Slavery restriction. 1t was roy opinion at that
time-and an not now very clear on that
Snhject-that the law of Cong ess, when the
STATE OF Missouri was admitted into the Union,
excluding Slavery from the Territory of i.ouisi-
ana north of SO deg 80 min, would be enforced
in that Territory, unless it was specially re-
seinded and whether that law was in accord
ance with the Constitution Of the United States
or not it would do it's work, and that work
would be to preclude Shareholders from going
into that Territory. Bat when came to look
into that question, | found there was no pros
pect, no hope, of repeal OF the Missouri Com
promise, excluding Slavery from that Territory.
Now, sir, am free to admit, that at this mo
ment, at this honr, and for all time to come,
should oppose the organization or the settle
ment of that Territory unless my constituents,
and the constituents of the whole South of the
slave States of the Union, could go into it upon
the same footing, with equal rights and equal
privileges, carrying that species of property
with them as other people of this Union. Yes,
sir, acknowledge that that would have gov
erned me, but have no hope that the restric-
t:on will ever be repealed
al have always been of opinion that the first
great error committed in the political history
of this country was the Ordinance of 1897, rem
dering the Northwest Territory free territory.
The next great error was the Missouri Conn
promise. But they are both irremedieble
There is no remedy for them. We must sub
nit to them. ! am prepared to do it. IL is
evident that tie Missouri Compromise cannot
be repealed. So far as that question is con.
cerned, we might as well agree to the admission
OF this Territory now, as next year, or five or
ten years hence."-Congressiona Globe, Second
Session, Thirty second Congress, voL 26, page
1I13
.Mr, CHASE That, sir, is the speech of the
Senator from Missouri, whose authority,
think, must go for something on this question.
What does he say Whom came to look into
that question "--of the possible repeal of the
Missouri prohibi tion-that was the question he
was looking into" found that there was no
prospect no hope, of repeal of the Missouri
Compromise excluding Slavery from that Ter
ritory." And yet sir, at that very moment,
according to this new doctrine of the Senator
from Illinois, it had been repealed three years
Well, the Senator from Missouri said, further,
that # he thought it possible to oppose this re-
strietion successfully, he never would consent
to the organization Of the Territory until it
was tescinded. But, said he, | acknowledge
that | have no hope that the restriction will
ever be repealed. Then he made some COM
plaink as other Southern gentlemen have fire.