The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-04-22

most active and clanorous throughout the Norf IL
is well 10 know who lead and who TO be
sociaes In this crusade beyond the Mississippi Are they
not the very who have uniformly opposed aud repu
dated compromises and Spurned the counses reconciliation
and ugtce2 The who cried aloud in 1850 when
agitation crushed by the passage OF the Of
adj asment The same men who have always denounced
the of 1920 and declared that they would regard il
or be bound by It'll They hypocriticay adopt the
called Missouri Compromise the platform of agitation
and present themselves before the country It's champions
defenders Can doubt that this done solely
purposes OF mischief? that they sincere than
consistent in their conduct?
II has been abundany shown that the act of 1920 was
moi compact agreement bargain in any just OF
those terms II simply legislative act subject like
all acts, TO modification repeal Nor has time given
IL sanction and force il did not originally possess
1t had OF the elements of compact first and
pcrence has proved that the vicious principle of congress
sonal interference il contains is the of continual
disagreement difficulty, and danger Besides, the Con-
gress OF 1920 had not the slightest right to bind the Con-
gress OF 1850 or the Congress Of 1854 One Legislature
cannot ordinarily, bind succeeding oneeanno tie up
question Of legislation and il from the field of po
itical power That is familiar doctrine, requiring
gument TO establish yindicate il But this is not all
The Of 1920 has been repudated than by
Congress as well as by the interests camorous in its
support
ii has been called the Missouri Compromise and inn
preston has prevailed that It, and it alone secured the adj
mission OF Missouri into the Union History is otherwise
In 1921 Missouri 10 the doors of Congress claiming
to be admitted as State She had right to such adj
mission, and without cavi the question of slavery.
Louisiana, which included the Missouri country
bought of France in 1909 slavery existed therein
that time and afterwards Ii open to settlement from
all parts of the Union and the inhabitants possessed and
exercised the ordinary rights of segovenment and local
legislation without question from any quarter The
try settled and improved with the view to its ncor
poraton in the great Union of States from which the
elements at least Of its population derived And
when the people of Missouri came to Congress in 1921
they not aliens interiors but freemen and
American citizens rightfully claiming and equal
participation in the advantages the federal Union They
had competent numbers, and republican constitution
Upon every principle of equity and justice they
titled to admission. But they also under the
ton of the act of 1920 and in conformity with its pro-
visions IL that act in the nature of compact the
obligation to admit Missouri was imperative. But the
plain right of the case and the obligation of what is
now called the Missouri Compromise, disrcgarded
Northern votes in the proportion of two to one, went
upon the journal OF the House against admission unless
Missouri would abolish slavery. This a direct re-
pudaton of the arrangement of the previous year. which
had left slavery untouched except in the unsettled region
ees OF the proposed State and proves that the act of
1920 not esteemed compact binding compromise
by northern members.
An objection urged against admission was that by a
clause in the Missouri constitution its Legislature
horzed to pass laws prohibiting the immigration of free
negroes into the State and il upon that point that
adjustment was had--a compromise effected 1t was pro-
vided that Missouri should declare that nothing in her
constitution should be construed affect the rights of c-
of other States under the national constitution This
was the Missouri Compromise by virtue OF which the State
was admitted rather than the previous act of 1920 the OBJ
legation of which had been repudated 1t compact
between the general aud the State of Missouri
induced by objection unreasonabeness of which NAV
be Judged of by the fact that Massachusetts, then had
act in full force forbddng the introduction of free
into that State and that other northern States have
passed laws of the same description.
In the proceedings Of 1921 Mr. Clay prominent ac-
tor and his reputation has been placed in part upon the
result attained But clearly the previous of 1920 las
regards its eighth section did bear the time the
sacred character sought to be given it. 1t sim
ply Legislative provision for unsettled territory subject al
ways TO modification repeal and ineffective the
admission Of Missouri which came in under subsequent
arrangement The principle of that eighth section APP
piled when Texas admitted and recalled when New
Mexico was organized As matter Of fact ii has had
extension practically existing but has been removed
already shown from portion of the territory which
II was originally applied An amendment extending the
line established by it westward toward the Pacific was
voted down when the Oregon bin pending, in ls4s.
II was again rejected when proposed to be applied the
Territories acquired from Mexico II has been down
over and again in Congress- and it became evident in
1850 that it could not be maintained IL became
to adopt other and better groundmorc consistent
with correct principles and the experience of the country
Cordially approved by interest party in the Union
and incapable of enduring logical examination and debate
necessarily yielded before the pressure Of agitation and
assault Then IL was that had substituted for IL in
legislation the principles of territorial rights and
gressiona non-nterventon which trust may endure to
I the end of the chapter.
The doctrine of the Missouri certainly overthrow
AS matter OF national policy IL is but special pleading
to say that it has not been heretofore technically formally
and totally repealed The point of debate lies deeper than
the reach Of legal bubble II strikes behind the legal
question upon statute to those foundations of right and
expediency upon which legislation must repose No party
be really satisfied with the Of 1920 and the strug
Nheh met IN congress, De-
tween the Calhoun doctrine and the Wmot provso. An
equal right for the South in the Territories be protected
II necessary by congressional legislation the doctrine
of Mr. Calhoun fortified and enforced by Of
ing which above all OF his generation he possessed
This doctrine reaches 10 all the Territories and is limited
by geographical line II involves the idea of congress
sona power effectively exercised protect and preserve
southern institutions when carried by emigration into the
Territories The Wimot provso with equal disregard OF the
Missouri line Of 80 deg 30 min. is build up a wall upon
the line of the Territories 10 prevent the of south
institutions Conservatism and innovation have been
arrycd against each other and their struggles
the government TO It's very foundations To the Mis-
sour line between the combatants is TO propose what is
acceptable TO neither cannot be defended upon principle
ard can never secure solid peace The mistake lies
permitting Congress 70 al all and hence the com
promise acts OF 1850 right and deserving Of support
Let Congress withhold its hand and leave the whole sub
ect where il properly belong-to the people of the Terri
i tories concerned
4 What have said will show in some degree the true
character Of the Missouri act of 1920 how inefficient IL
been to prevent agitation; how often il has been con-
spire confidence and respect II viii be fully worth the
cost of struggle TO strike from national policy EFFECT
ualy and finally the vicious principle of congressional in
reference which il mbodies and exemplifes.
Sir there difficulties in the way Of fair discussion
here Of subject involving the question Of slavery Upon
every ordinary question OF debate there parties
whose interests affected by its decision and from whose
is existing interest in the North to oppose the activity
and fury OF tanatcism In supporting sound doctrines
have but ground upon which 10 stand We make
appeals in but direction appeal only TO those
principles Of justice and right which ought but do not al
regulate the conduct of nations and States The prn
ciple Of comfy among the States Of the Union and the
right Of equal participation By all the States in the adj
IN h Tho