Weekly hawk-eye and telegraph. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1855-1857, 1856-04-30

sss,sss IN - psshibi-
ted; assas
Is tae essse = ~ h ii ths v.ss dosaain
~ '1ekes + - fsovtd ~ tlsst one o. more q
shese ioaf nee states shouid ~ st,soinfeiy fire..
and shst u The rersaining States thas formed
might BE admitted IL lrre States fhould the POO
pie deirr Il. And herr again the subiecs reatcd
nntil tise year 1854. sssS &C.
Bun ii the adjustment osthe difficulties grow
ing ent 81 tc scquiation Of large territories from
Mexico, ~ trophies Of sss, Trrisorial Govrrn-s
rnensr we're estsbIished Tor Utah and New Arxi-
co, with conditional provision for esch
That when admitted a State. the said Ter
ritory. or any portion Of the ssnac, shsi pc re.
cciyed into the LUTON With or without Slavery,
As their Constitution may prescribe at the tune
Of their admission. :
Here, for the rst time, the Territorial policy Of
the Government, settied and unlfrom Tor nearly
three quarters Of = century, was changed Al
the machinery OF the ship Of State here began 70
revo.ye In different direction. The Nor Invest.
Trrri.ory. now embraced WITHIN the limits OF re
large and powerful States, was originally Stare
territory, by virtue OF the laws OF Virginia iand
other slave States ceding tito the Union, rs
much 30 AZ the Territory Of Kentucky, once
held ~ u part Of her domin'ons. BIT, by the
Ordinance Of 1887, it was all dedicated 70 Free
dom. = .s..
The territory now embraced within the limits
of Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, aud Kansas, Was
doab tess ssarc territory by yirtae OF French and
Spar ish laws. But by the enactment OF the MIS-
sour Compromise ii was dedicated TO Freedom.
m the vast domain Of Texas was, without dis
putfe slave territory, by virtue OF her own laws,
ems cted and enforced during her nationality.
BIT, BY the legislation of Congress admitting
her into the Union. large part OF this, TOO, y
prospcctiyely dedicated TO Freedom. But the
Territories of New Mexico and Utah were, bs
virtue Of Mexican laws. ABSOLUTELY FREE, when
by the legislation of the Congress Of the
United States, they were thrown open to Slav-
cry.
But this Revision in the Territorial policy Of
the Government in 1850 this conditionalconver-
sion OF free territory to the uses of Slavery, in
violation of the settled policy Of the country,
growing out of what had been supposed to be
s,the compromises of the constitution" and in
violation Of the moral feelings and clear conric-
tons Of right of an overwhelming majority OF
the American people, was secured not by deny
ing the power OF Congress to exclude Slavery,
but in the name OF concession and compromise,
|
mia ,citlodt Slavery, although previously free by
force of Mexicrn laws and by virtue of her otcsi
constitutions at the time of her appllcation--in
connection with the enactment of laws for the
modification OF the boundary of the State OF
Texas, the Abolition OF the Stare trade in the
| District OF Columbia, and the return Of the iu-
gtives from labor.
The passage of these organic laws for Utah
and New Mexico completed the settlement of the
question of Slavery in all the Territories ofthe
United States Slavery was not prohibited in Utah
land New Mexico by the laws OF Congress; but
in all that vast region including Minnesota, Kan
| sas, Nebraska, Oregon, aud Washington, Slavery
uas still prohibited. This adjustment, obtained
| through the influence OF such men us Clay and
| Webster-now passed TO their final reward--and
men that see AROUND me- with the legislative ek-
| perience of halfa century browning their broWs,
| was said to be final. Repo-ing confidence in the
| wisdom and patriotism Of statesmen WHO had
| stood firmly ily their country flag and the Con-
stitution during the darkest hours ofour national
| history--wlo had been defenders of their homes
| aud their rights while the majority ofthem were
slill in their mother sarns, the people peeaceably
| hon Il in ni;,ly Instances restiesSly and reuc-
ianty, acq,liesced in this supposed "hnality.s
| The admission OF Slavery into Utah and New
| Mexico was nor claimed ASA constitutional right
| it was asked as nm element Of compromise. No
| one is sufficiently reckless to pretend that the
Compromise Measures of lS5D could have
received the approval Of Congress, muell.less Of
| the pc ople, with the understanding that this
enactment opened all the Territories of the
| u,,ion to the occupancy of slu,eholding com.
| munities
| la support of the proposition stated, desire,
in The second pluce TO cite the Legislation OF Cor
| gress in the organization OF Territorial Govern
ments and in tie admission OF States formed out
| oil TERRITORY previously free
| From these citations q remark in pasSing) ii
will be seen that the President is in error when
he says in his annual message, in relation to the
prohibition OF Slavery in the Northwest Terrific
| ry by the Ordinance OF 1887, that
Subsequent to the Constitution, this provision
ceased 10 remain law, tor its operation was
absolutely superseded by the Constitution"
In the year 1889, the very first Congress con-
yened under the provisions OF the Constitution
passed law transferring certain duties imposed
by this Ordinance on Congress to the President
Of the United States, (as is expressly stated in
the preamble to this laws
In order that the Ordinance of the United
States in Congress assembled for the govern
ment OF the Territory northwest OF the river Ohio
may continue to have full effect" -.Statutes at
Large, vol. LIP 5n.)
In the year 1870, Congress declared, in the or
ganic law of the Territory of Indiana,
THAT there shall be established within said
Territory Il Government in all respects similar to
that provided by the Ordinance Of. Congress pass
ed on the 18Th day OF July, 1887, for the govern
ment fthe Territory of The United States north
west of the river Ohio; and the inhabitants
shall be entitled to and enjoy all and singular
the rights, privileges, and advantages granted
aud secured to the people by .he said Ordinance"
-(Stdtntes at Large, vol. /, p. so
In 1872, tAprii au) Congress passed law to
enable the people OF Ohio to form State Consli-
tuition, in which il is provided that said Constitu-
ton shall not "be repugnantto the Ordinance cf
the 18th July, 1887. between the original States
and the.peope and States Of the Territory north
west Of the river Ohio. ~ Statutes at Large, VOL
2, TIA.
In 1909 February 81 Congress Incorporated
the same provision in the organic law OF Illinois
that was made u part of the organic law OF Indi-
ana Statutes at Large, vol 2, p. 5l5.)
In 1915, the same provision was made in the
organic law Of Mchigan.-( Statutes at Large,
vol 9, p 3a9.) SIS
In the year 1916, tApril 19,) Congress passed
law authorizing the people of Indiana to form
State Constitution, in which it provided
''That the same, whenever formed, shall be re-
publican, and not repugnant to those articles of
the Ordinance of the l4th OF July,.> 1881, which
are declared 10 besirresocable between the orig
inal States aud the peop,e and Sites of the Ter
ritories northwest oft!e Ono river. ~ Statutes
at Large, vol 3. p. ayt,.l
In 1916, December ll,) Congress passed a
resolution declaring, anon o:her things, that
where's he Constitution formed by The people
OF the Territory OF Indiana is republican, and in
conformity with The provisions of the ordl-
nance" Move recited, .'tife said Safe is admit
ted into the Union. ~ Statutes a! Large, vol 8,
p. 3a9.)
In ISIS, Congress authorized the people of Hi
ncs to Torn, Il Safe Constitution, conditioned
thar it shonld CONFORM to the provisions OF the
Ordinance OF l7s7.-( S;ats1.es at Large vol,S, p.
4Sa.1
On Dccembcr3. 1918, Illinois was BY sese!a-
ton admitted '.'o The Union IS soecreirn
Sate, OH the grosna shat her culsi.asisn, thus
formed, did conform % the provisions OF the
Ordinance of l7SI.-(StetuteS at Large, vol. 3,
p 53ti.)
In the year 1920, rs ne have before stated,
Congress declared. IN the law providing Tor the
admission OF Missouri INTO the Uuion,
That in all that territory cef,ed by France to
the United States, under the na,lse OF Louisi,na.
which lies north oil thirty-Six degrees and thirty