The daily union., 1856-01-27

ton sent down from the Senate proposing extend
the Missouri line ~ the Pacific coast would the gentleman
from Tennessee have voted for itY UH
Mr.. zoLLiCoFFER. Well Mr.. Clerk win answer the
Il gentleman in this way
Mr.. STEPHENS. cannot give the gentleman my time
except ior direct answer 10 my question. want TO
know whether when Congress providing governments
for the Territories acquired from Mexico, he would il he
had been here have voted for the Of the Missouri
line through those Territories not ~
j Mr.. ZoLLlCoFFER The time has been Mr., Clerk,
when the great body Of at the South for the sake Of
choosing what they considered the smaller of two evils
had fallen in with this Missouri Compromise line but sir
my own opinion Is that had at that time occupied seat
upon this floor should have felt be my duty In
yesgae the subject with care and to deliberately
upon that invespato and that should voted 10
'asan the principles recognised IN The compromise measures
Mr. STEPHENS, My question is would the gentleman
have voted for the Missouri Compromise line at the time
/ Mr. zoLLICoFFER My answer is, that | would have
voted in accordance with the principles of the compromise
acts of 1850 % iears e people Of Me Territories dmne
e question Of saroy for Meniselres when they came TO
form State government
Mr. STEPHENS. The gentleman said he would giveme
direct answer. lie has not Now wish put to the
gentleman from Tennessee another question u.s. wheh
when those southern he has spoken Of before they
got the principles OF 1850 now carried out in the Kansas
bill chose the less instead OF the greater evil he has
said, when every man from Tennessee, every from
Georai every man from South Caronan word, every
man whg and democrat south Of Mason and Dixons line
voted for that measure they acting upon theory
more dangerous TO the South than abotonsm itsef2
Mr. zotLlCOFFER The principles of 1850 and of the
Nebraska bill were then urged and old
the constitution repeat what at the very outset
and DO not mean to be understood saying that those
gentlemen were less patriotic in their motives than those
who UNDERSTOOD the gentleman from Georgia now un-
ders,ands the principle Of noninervenon in the Nebras
ka and Kansas BILL that their theory was more danger
than aboonsm itself but say nevertheless that
the theory whoever entertain it. that the power exists
IN the federal government to determine forever for the
States to be formed out of the Territories of the United
States the fundamental constitutional principles of those
States determine whether slavery shall exist there
notis theory dangerous to the South than the
overt movements OF abolitionism ITSELF
MIR. STEPHENS. am here TO defend that theory far
as my action under il is concerned say it wise
theory looking TO the peace Of the country under the cir
cnmstances. say just theory so far as II was
founded an the principle Of fair division Of the Territory
preferred anotherthe principle established in 1850 Sti
there was nothing aggressive in il that the country
might not have been satisfied with il if it had been abided
by acted on il only alternative. Nor do hold
that the whole South in adhering TO it, danger
Gus to themselves than abolitonism ITSELF Nor sir do
constitution Of he United sa,es Ts sa wbe aso
maintain that the constitution gives to Congress orig
na or substantive power 70 prohibit slavery ia the Terri
tories OF this country The gentleman find any
remarks that have made that have advocated
the existence Of such power have entertained
the beginning .s
have always maintained that this heory Of the crea
on Of territorial governments outside the contempa
ton OF the constitution. 1t rests upon power resulting
from the acquisition Of territory which the constitution
never contemplated But when acquired the duty de-
wolves upon congress either TO IT TO provide
government for it. And in governing providing gov
ernments Congress has power either express iH,-
Piled direct or incidental to pass any law which would
deprive portion OF the people Of the several States Of
their right 10 just and fair participation In the public do
main But law regulation, looking to disposition Of
tho public domain property, based upon the
principle Of division the two sections disagree
ing they do upon the subject of slavery hold may be
constitutional or, at least not voatiye OF It, While the
exercise therefore, OF such power by general exclusion
would be wholly unconstitutional yet under circumstances
qualified have stated IL might be properly exercised
AS understood the honorable gentleman from Illinois
MIR RlcnARpsosl 10 hold the other day. the exercise of
this power may ag BE- perfectly consistent with the
constitution just and proper in instance aud wholly
inconsistent with IL unjust and improper in another.
Mr.. NOLLiC0FFER. Mr.. Clerk desire TO say that II
have not done justice in every respect the position taken
by the gentleman from Georgia former occasion de-
sire 10 do sent fifteen minutes ago, 10 the
Congressional Library for copy Of the Congressional
Globc containing remarks OF The gentleman from Geo-
ga which have referred upon which the statement
have made as to his position was predcated. have not
yet received IT, hope 10 receive presently and then
win give TO the House the record upon which based my
opinion.
Mr. STEPHENS. The gentleman misapprehends me IL
he supposcs that held the idea opinion that Con-
gres has the general unlimited TO exclude slavery
from the Territories OF the United States Never sir but
have held, aud do hold now that the power 10 organ
izng governments and disposing OF the common territory
can be properly and consiutonay exercised the prn
cpes OF fair division The gentleman seems to belong
to class men who argue that Il Congress exclude
| therefore exclude II from all the Territories.
Mr.. zoLblc0fFER Thst Is the position Of the gentle
day In his place that II you exercise power part
Of the Territory you the whole OF the Territory
Mr. STEPHENS. No, sir. ! endorse every word that
the gentleman from Illinois has said this subject Hc
says that he voted for the extension OF the MssourCom-
promise line asd that he did think in doing that be
violating the constitution think So too. lie says
that the Of the power other than by compromise
fair division of territory would be wrong and uOus,
and riciafir not Of he letter at ieaa n ue sird Of The
eonsiitution. So say, too. And why would IL in my
opinion be 10 exclude slavery from all
the Territories? The constitution Is silent the subject
the government OF the Territories have always main
tanned that power incident and resulting one
and as look on all resulting powers this TO be
fairly justly exercised When exercised in that way
hold that IL is constitutional II not IL Is WRONG and
unjust and antamount TO violation Of express prov
ion OF the constitution IL Is violation Of the spirit Of
the constitution because on It's injustice
Mr.. ZOLLIC0FFER. N Congress has The power 10 ex-
cude slavery from onehaf Of the Territory has II not the
power TO exclude from all the Terri tory
Mr.. STEPHENS. No sir. That Is the point II wonld
be unjust and for that very such power Of
era exclusion could be properly exercised The govern
OF the United States under the operation of the
laws and within the purvew contemplation Of
any Of the granted powers Of the government acquired
surplus revenue II contemplated by Che
stituhou that such fund should be amassed A dis
ribution OF the fund fairly aud justly between all the
States, bol6 perfectly constitutional But suppose
the North bad said Here Is outside OF the consu-
ton There is not word In that instrument the sub
ect The fund has been UNEXPECTEDLY acquired under the
among all the States equally Il shall be taken exclusively
by those where slavery does not exist that no savehod
ing State shall touch dollar Of - Would that have
heen con sttutionalI