Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-10-08
The Compromise of 1850.

The Compromise of 1850. ..
Numerous correspondents have written tC
us for copies of these Compromise Measures Of
1850" There is no publication within our
knowledge embracing these measures by them
selves The session acts of Congress of 1850
contain them. These are only to be found at
Law Book stores. We have on several occa-
sions given our readers a view of the Terrific
rial bills Of Utah and New Mexico, the only
measures Of the series about which any con-
trariety of legislation exists. But to crafty,
as far as our space will allow, the desire of our
readers to examine the Compromise meas
ures of 1850, and to contrast the provisions
Of the Kansas Nebraska act with those of Utah
and New Mexico, we will give to-day the sub
stance of all the " Compromise measures" Of
1850, and the language of the Territorial acts
about which, alone has any controversy, Of
late, arisen.
The fire measures, embraced in the term
Compromise measureslef $780," are the fol-
lowing, to-wit;
1st. The admission Of California as a State,
with constitution interdicting slavery.
I'd. The Sc Element of the boundary line be-
tween Texas and New Mexico.
Sd. The establishment Of Territorial govern
ments for Utah and New Mexico, allowing
their future admission as States, "with or
without slavery"
4th The prohibition Of depots for the sale OF
slaves in the District Of Columbia.
9th. The enactment of the Fugitive Slave
law, providing for the recapture Of slaves, who
have escaped from their owners
b These FIVE measures were originally en-
braced in one bill, denominated the /" omnibus
bill, which was defeated in the Senate, where
it originated Each of these measures was
then separately brought forward, and each
obtained majority of votes in the two Houses,
Of Congress, and all were approved by Mr.. Fill
more,
M LIST measure, California was admitted as a
State, with constitution framed by her citizens,
and which interdicted the existence Of slavery,
within her borders, A large portion of her
territory lying south Of SO IL degrees of north
latitude, and her constitution having been
formed under circumstances leading Southern
men to think justice had not been done the
South, in the mode, time, and manner Of fra
ming her constitution, her admission was re-
sisted at first, but finally permitted
I'd measure The State of Texas embraced .
large portion of the territory now claimed
within the limits of New Mexico The present
boundary line was agreed upon, and Texas was
paid ten millions Of dollars for surrender OF
her claim to the disputed territory.
These two measures embrace no point d
present controversy between the North and
South, and it is therefore not important to pre-
sent the details Of those measures
Sd measure The establishment of Territorial
governments for Utah and New Mexico.
The discussion and adjustment of this mea.
sure, (for the two acts embrace the same prin-
ciples, and may in this respect be treated as
one,) involved the questions embraced in the
missouri restriction, and in the "Wilmot
proyiso." The Missouri restriction " prohib-
tied slavery in all the territory coded by France
to the United States, and lying north Of SO 10
degrees north latitude The "Wilmot provi-
so was general prohibition Of slavery in any
territory Of the United States without reference
to latitude. The missouri restriction COW
cred specifically that territory, AMI none
other, which was coded by France to the
United States, under the name Of Louisiana
and lying north of SO IL degrees north lati.
tude.
The words Of the Missouri restriction are
as follows
That in all that territory coded by France to the
United States, under the name of Louisiana, which
lies north of thirty-sx degrees and thirty minutes
north latitude not included within the limits Of Tho
State, Missouri contemplated by this act slavery
and involuntary servitde, otherwise than IN thepun
ishment of crimes, &C. is hereby forever prohibited
The territory out Of which Utah and New
Mexico we're formed, was derived from Mexico
and not from France, and therefore, the terms
Of the Missouri restriction did not embrace
them. The North generally desired to apply
the principle Of the "Wilmot Proyiso" to
the territory acquired from Mexico The