The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-09-03
.easatAgaus $500 or

hold themselves aloof from the mongrel herd into which
my colleague has strayed Here their
q. sd at 1851, IN us HtiAOis Isgislaturs a
Adams Of Whiteside Allan of Henry, Arms of Knox,
BeekmAn of Cess Breckenrdge Of sangamon Brewer o.
Montgomery, Bristow Of Morgan, Edwards Of Madison,
Hodges Of resne Knapp Of Scott Miller Of Madison Mil
Ter Of Winnebago Persnger Of Schuyler Pickering OF Ed
wards Singleton Of Brown Thomas OF Morgan Thornton
And here sir in the same goodly company the dem
ocrats who voted for that restriction, t.a..g
The democrats who voted for the resolution are as fol-
Bailey Of Edgar Barnett Of De Witt Blakely of Effng
ham Breese of Clinton, Burke OF Macoupin Caldwell OF
Vermilon DIETRICH OF Randolph Dyer Of Cook Edwards
of Sangamon Evans OF Fayette Ferrl Of Williamson,
Cash Of Wayne Hall OF Kane Hise Of La Sale Hobbs OF
Adams, Howard of Jo Dayiess, Huston of MeDonough,
Liney of Fulton Little Of Fulton Morton Of White MUIR
ply Of Perry, Nixon Of Mcenry Patterson of St. Clair
Pemberton Of Mason, Phillips Of Washington Quick Of
Monroe Randall OF WILL Sans Of Franklin, Sanborn Of
Peoria, Sibey Of Hancock, Smonds OF Union Shaw Of
Lawrence Sloan Of Pope Snyder of st Clair Wlets OF
Henderson, Winters OF Greene. a ~ s a- .a.str N
If there i single of these democrats since swerved
from the faith they then proessed not aware OF IT,
And here sir are the nays upon that resolution and mo-
table guarete they TO be sure, call them what yon
abolitonists "free-soers ANY thing but wings
or democrats Adam Of Kane, Gage Of McHenry NoRToS
Of Will Swan Of Lake. There they are: "look at 'em."
NV colleague and three more And yet my colleague calls
himself Henry Clay wbig Why sir on the 29th of Jan
nary 1850, Mr. Clay introduced his compromise resou-
Resoped That is inexpedient abolish slavery in the
District Of Columbia whilst that institution continues
without the Of people Of the District and without
just compensation to the owners OF the slaves within the Dis
T. Resolved, That eectual provision ought to be
made BY law, according to the requirement. Of the oonstt
or labor in any State who may other
State or Territory Of the Union. .5 4. ..I.. ri
strict the trade in slaves between tie savehedng States
but that the admission exclusion of slaves brought from
one into another Of them depends exclusively upon their
Now let us test by the record the whggery of my col
league. On the day of January, 1851 the following
resolution offered for adoption in the illinois ega
ture;
Rssossd That approve the recently passed
by Congress for the Of all the questions growing
of the acquisition OF territory from Mexico, and that
and representatives in Congress who aided the
Of the State of Illinois for their patriotic efforts for the pres
eryation of the Union. ..4ay. s... .....-
Upon the passage of this resolution my colleague voted
"Eo" and yet he pretends that he good Clay whig
Heaven the markl s".s1. as# .sa. .E4s
The gentleman said up to 1854 the democratic platform
like that of the black republicans The assertion Ia
baseess it has not particle of fact to stand upon
What the platform erected by those with whom the
gentleman acts? Here is the platform of the convention
held Bloomington in 1854 which sent colleague here
Resolved accept forced upon us by the
slave power and in defence of freedom will
republicans pledged to the accomplishment of the
To bring the back to the control Of first
free territories to restrict slavery to the States In which
exists prohibit the admission Of any more slave States
over which the general exclusive urdic-
ton and to resist the requirement of territory
unless the prohibition Of slavery therein forever shall have
been secured. .t. -A..,s ..a ~
The first State convention of the black-repubcan party
in Illinois adopted as part of their platform tie following
resolution: r.
Resolued That the times imperativey demand the
ganizaon of PARTIES and, repudiang all previous party
together o the liberty and tie Constitution
country and will hereafter cooperate the republican
poses to Bring the Of the back
to the control of first principles to restore Kansas and
suion the United States vests the States and not
Congress- the to egate for the extradtion of ugi
exists prohibit the admission Of any more slave State.
ba to exclude slavery from ali the Territories over which
the general government has exclusive jurisdiction and
practice of slavery therein shall have been prohibited
The resolution passed. word for word, by the
Aurora convention on the goth of September 1854 and
similar resolutions every where adopted by these black
republicans with further resolution "to support man
for Office under the general State government who
not positively and fully committed to the support Of these
principles whose character and conduct
guarantee that he was reliable and who shall not have
aIjared all party allegiance and ties And does my col
league dare assert that any democratic organization
held such doctrines hese2 He spoke without reflection
without information, surely. d. .-
Mr.. NORTON. Does my colleague wish an answer?
MIR. HARRIS. did not ask my colleague question.
My colleague is exceedingly uneasy in his seat
Mr.. NORTON. Will my colleague allow me to reply
Mr.. HARRIS. My colleague is excited and uneasy, and
not at all surprised at It, after making such assertions
Mr.. NORTON. | understood my colleague TO ask me a
question, and desire to answer it.
Mr.. HARRIS. have asked him various questions and
when he has undertaken TO them, has flown of
upon other matters having nothing TO do with the
TONS and am tired OF INDUCING him in that way
But the gentleman says If the Missouri Compromise was
repealed in 1850 why repeal II agan2 The gentleman
will bear in mind that in the Kansas Nebraska bill Ii is
repealed" There is therein only legislative decar-
alton that by the Compromise Of 1880 the Missouri Com
promise superseded and was therefore imperative
and void II meets the exact question: and presents upon
the face of the bill what declare outside OF It. The gen
eman went into argument to show that ought
TO have been repealed in order to make II in conformity
the act Of 1850. The gentleman will that the Ter
rores could not be placed upon the footing 1t
repealed either by positive declaration by legislation
which superseded It. 1t Is said that when acquired the
territory included In New Mexico and Utah free ter
rory shall not discuss that point bat certain Is
the bills Of 1850 provided that the legislative power OF
the Territories utah and New Mexico) shall extend TO all
rghul subjects Of legislation consistent with the consttu-
ton Of the United States slavery not excluded That bill
further provided that when admitted States the said
Territories should be received into the Union, with or
without slavery, their constitutions should prescribe at
pee power could the people Of these Territories over
TO the constitution Aud yet fthe Missouri restriction
as my colleague contends was In force in Kansas will he
say h the people Kansas could have had equal power
uness IL repealed declared void Certainty not
Them IL clearly follows that in order put Kansas and
ehraa he Wit Utah nd Me-,