Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-01-03
The Eject OF the Douglas Texas Prohi-
biti0n,

The Eject OF the Douglas Texas FROM
bition.
We have shown the danger to the country,
and to the South particularly, of the course
pursued by the prominent leaders of the adj
ministration party; we have exposed their in
consistencies, and their want OF reliability, as
Legislators. We have shown that their object,
and only object was to agitate the country to
cause sectional trouble; to destroy the peace
and happiness Of the nation; and, finally, to
dissolve the confedcracy Of States.
We shall now proceed to show the effect of
the Douglas Texas Prohibition, and the posi-
ton of the administration party in relation
thereto.
The following members Of the House Of Re
representatives. voted for this prohibition:
Georgia Edward J. Black, Alexander H. Ste
phens, Hugh A. HARRISON, John II. Lumpkin, How
ell Cobb and William IL. Stiles. l0
South Cdroii,,d--Jam es A. Black, Richard i.
Simpson, Armistead Burt, Isacc Y. Holiness and II.
Barnwell Rhett.
North Carolina-T Thomas l.. Clngman, Daniel
NJ. Barringer, David S. Reid, Edmund Deberry,
Romulus NJ Saunders, James j. Mckay, John X.
Daniel, and Archibald H. Arlington.
Msssssippi--Jacob Thompson.
Louisiana--John Slidell Alcee Labranche, and
j. b. Dawson.
Mssour,--Gustavus NJ. Bower, Jas. B. Bowln,
James Ii. Relfe, and James NJ. Hughes
Aykansas--Edward Cross.
VSrginid--Archibald Atkinson, Geo. q. Drom-
goole, Edmund w. Hubbard, VIM. L. Goggin, John
W. Jones, Thomas II. Bayly, Willoughby Newton,
samuel Chiffon, william Lucas William Taylor,
Augustus A. Chapman, George w. Hopkins, and
Lewis Steenrod.
Kentueky-Linn Boyd, DC.
The following Senator'S voted for it
Yeas---Messrs. Allen, Ashley, Atchson, Ather
| ton, Bayly, Benton, Breese, Buchanan, Colquitt,
Dickinson, Dix, Fairfield Hannegan, Haywood,
Henderson, Huger, johnson, Lewis, McDuffe Mer-
rick, Niles, Semple, SEWER Sturgeon, Tappan,
Walker, and Woodbury-2T.
! The Douglas Texas prohibition is in these
words.
sand in such State or States as shall be formed
out of said Territory, north Of the said Missouri
Compromise line, slavery or involuntary servitude
Except for crimes) shall be prohibited"
! This prohibition applied to the Territory
for that is the word employed, and to all "of
said territory north of the said Missouri line,
that is, to all Of Texas lying north Of the line
4 VI on uck. on Ills pIOlllUlllUH uOb a
mere law Of Congress, repealable by Congress,
but it is a compact between TIVE sovereignties,
between two coshtries-the United States and
Texas and is condition upon which Texas
| became part of the United States. 1t is
| treaty between two distinct nations by which
they were united into one The compact of
annexation must be taken as whole, and if
| any portion of It be illegal or repealable, the
wholemust be. What then, must be the Of
feet Of the Douglas prohibition? A portion of
the territory Of Texas at the time of her adj
mission into the Union now constitutes por-
ton of Kansas, and lies north Of the Missouri
Compromise line. 1t is known now rs part
Of Kansas, and by that name. It was known
then as part Of Texas, and by that name but
the Douglas prohibition applied not to the
name, but to " said territory, north of the said
Missouri Compromise line.S The prohibition
is imperative while "said territory is under
a Territorial organization, but as soon as it is
erected into Estate or States" it is in full
force.
This prohibition upon the future g State or
States in the compact of annexation, was the
act Of Southern men, as the record fully ex-
hibits. The intent and meaning Of the pro-
hibition is clear and distinct Are they not
bound by its And when any portion of ''said
territory" is erected into State or States" at
that moment the Douglas prohibition becomes
operative and in full force And is not her adj
mission into the Union as "a State" a con-
dtion Of the fulflment of the compact of al
nexation? If So she will be free State.
Then what has the South gained by the Kan
sas-Nebraska bis
1t will doubtless be contended that this pro-
hibition was repealed by the Kansas N ebraska
act Can a law of Congress repeal any portion
Of the compact Of annexation We think not.
The Kansas-Nebraska bill repeats the Missouri
Compromise line as established by the act of
1920, which only established the line to the
western boundary of Missouri. The compact
of annexation extended it through Texas to
its western boundary This was in 1915. The
Kansas n ebraska bill does not allude to the
Missouri Compromise line as extended by the
act OF 1916, or the compact of annexation, but
only repeats the line as established by the act
of 1920, which established it only as the south
ern boundary Of Missouri, and not through
Texas II must DO admitted, then, that the
Kansas-N Nebraska act does not in terms repeal
the Texas prohibition. 1t may be said that
the establishment of the principle Of "squattcr
sovereignty" in the Kansas Nebraska bill,
which gives the power to the people to regu-
late their own domestic affairs, renders the
Douglas prohibition imperative, and that il is
in effect repealed. But this Douglas prohbi-
ton applies TO a." State or States y whereas