The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-10-16


Delaware s MHsRr& Aye Aye.
Virginia Gr, y on, Aye.
carrington Aye.
North Carolina h RlS%Ii Aye Aye.
South Carolina kesn Aye.
Huger Aye
Georgia Few Aye.
| Pierce Aye"
Every State represented voted in the affirma-
tive-every Southern voted for it-while
but one single delegate from the North Mr..
Yates of New York; voted against it.
Thus was this great measure of Freedom car
ried. No Southern rights were invaded then.
The statesmen of that day thought only OF doing
their duty to their country and TO posterlty. Inc
idea of property in man had not perverted their
judgment. They rejected that guilty phantasy
This early policy of restricting Slavery was
adopted two years before the adoption OF the
| Constitution but at the exact time when that In
strument was being framed. The Convention
that formed the Constitution and the Continental
Congress that passed the Ordinance were both in
session at the same time-one In New I ork and
the other in Phiadelphia-and there is no doubt
there full understanding on this subject.
The clause in the Constitution giving Congress
| power to make all needful rules and regula-
tons respecting the Territories, &C., must have
been suggested by the Ordinance, and designed
to sanction and approve it.
This view is confirmed by the fact that the
| first Congress under the Constitution, in which
were Madison and other members of the Consti-
| tutional Convention, passed an act confirming
| and re-enacting the Ordinance. The adoption
| of the Constitution rendered some changes neces-
sary, such as the appointment of officers for the
Territory, &c. The preamble of this act OF Con-
gress recites, that I" il is necessary certain pro-
| visions should be made" &c, in order that the
Ordinance "mdy continue TO hare full effect" This
| act was signed by President Washington, who
was also President of the Constitutional Conven-
| ton.
am willing to rest the constitutional power
of Congress to prohibit Slavery in the Territories
on this action of Congress, sanctioned as it was
| by Madison and Washington.
| From this time down to 1850, Congress ex-
ercsed exclusive legislative control over the Ter
ritories, prohibiting Slavery in every case where
it had no existence at the time and regulating it
in cases where it existed. If | had time, would
! refer particularly to the acts of Congress estab-
fishing Territorial Governments, and show how
| uniformly Slavery was prohibited in every free
| Territory. Such was the case in Michigan and
Illinois, by acts passed under Mr.. Jeffersons Ad-
| ministration. Such was the case in Indiana,
| Wisconsin, Iowa, and Oregon.
In the great contest in 1920, which resulted in
| the Missouri Compromise the same principle
was reafiirmed. Missouri was admitted as
slave State, on condition that the residue of the
Territory north of $50 3O' should be forever Free
A majority of the Southern members, in both
branches of Congress, voted for Slavery prohibi-
ton in this case. The Senate was equally divided
| between the North and South. Out of twenty
two members from the South, fourteen voted for
the restriction, and eight against it; and of the
Northern Senators, twenty voted for it, and two
against it.
OF seventy-six Representatives from slavehold-
ing States who voted on the question of restric-
ton, thirty nine voted for it, and thirty-seven
against it. OF the Representatives from the free
States, ninety-fve voted for it, and only five
against it.
On the passage of the bill, as amended with
the restriction, very large majority of the
Northern members voted against it. They were
in favor of the restriction, but opposed to the
admission of Missouri slave State. 4 very
large majority of the Southern members voted
for it, on its passage-all the Senators except
two; and all the Representatives except thirty
seven.
Thus WAS this measure passed. 1t was a
triumph for the South. They gained the poin,
they were then contending for, viz the adms-
sion of Missouri ms a slave State
| Writing of this restriction or Compromise
Charles Pnckney, of South Carolina under the
date of March 2, 1920, said
1--WE have carried the question to admit Missouri and
all Louisiana the southwark of 3Go so free of the
restriction Slavery and gre the South short
addition Of aud perhaps eight members the Ssnat
, IL
holding States a great Triumph the close
ninety eighty tihe vote first declaredl
produced by the seeding and absence of few modera
from the North. To the north of 800 30 there is
be- by the present law, which you will by
the votes voted against; but IT is at present of no mo
ment II is n tract minbabiied only by savage
and wild beats IN which foot Of the Indian claim
The soil is exngushed ard in which, according ih
ideas PREVALENT no land Office will he open for grea
y length of Tune"
1t was generally regarded as a Southern vic.
4 tory. The North was put off with prospective
N
l, then regarded of little value. After enjoying al
II the benefits of Missouri and Arkansas, as sav,
. States for more than thirty years, and when
v land Office" was about to be opened in Free
II doms tract" the South all at once discovered
!" that there was great wrong in the bargain that
it unconstitutional, und unjust to them
II They do not propose to give up what they OBJ
e tanned in 1920 but they coolly say to the North
ave will retain our portion of the Territory
o and take that which belongs to you
e Gentlemen should remember that some things
; are constitutional which are not for their pecu
ar interests. 1t has always seemed to me tina
he South were very much disposed to call every
hing unconstitutional that in any way interfere,
q with the interests of Slavery.
y There were no doubts of the constitutionalit,
II of the Missouri restriction when it passed. Whel
d this subject under discussion in 1920, Mr.
n Taylor, distinguished member of Congress iron
New York, remarked, in the debate I" that h
e knew of no one who doubted the constitutions
power OF Congress to make the prohibition"
: Before signing the bill, President Monroe tool
the opinion of his Cabinet as to its constitution
y ality. 1t is well known that John c. Calhoun
q John O. Adams, and William Writ, were mem
IN bers of the Cabinet. present the following fact
e upon this point, from Mr.. Monroes manuscripts
II 4 paper endorsed, " Intcrrogatories Missouri
e March 4, 1920. To the Heads Of Departments an
d Attorney neutrality-suspicious. on opposite page
III HAS Congress right power vested il b
7, the Constitution make regulation prohibiting Slave
\ | ~ in a reTrIiory,
n ais the eighn section of the act WHICH passed hot
Houses TIE ID instant, for the admission of Missou
r into the UHiOn consistent with the Consitution ,"
q With the above is the original draught of
- letter. in the handwriting of President Monrof
u IL is not addressed to any one, but is suppose
TO have been written to Gen. Jackson The LET
! ter is as follows:
a DEAR SIR: The question which lately agiaied Cor
gress and the public has been settled, you may hav
SEEN by the passage of for the admission Of M
l, souri State unrestrsined and Arkansas hke~is
when reaches maturity and the establishment of $50 y
nosih latitude ne north of which Slavery prohii
tied, ard permitted 10 the south. took the opinion
writing, ofhe sra'ion 10 the sti uonaity
restraining Territories and bs rok Of erery neubty
aad* which explicit of IL,
: rs that the sh section of the applicable
Territories only, and 10 States when they should
admitted the Union On this latter point had mr.
some doubt; but the opinions Of others. whose opinion
u entitled weight with supported by the
a in which il viewed by all who voted the suhjei
Congress will appear by the Journals satisfied
respecting IL"
& 'The words in italics erased IN the draught.