The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-10-16
Mr.. cLAY-THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE.
REDsToYE, FAYErTE Co., PENN,
October /, 1856.

10 tie Editor Of the National Era:
Will you have the goodness to answer the
following interrogstories?
Is Henry Clay considered the father of the
Missouri Compromise of 1920?
| Did be ever maintain the constitutionality of
that measure, or anything tending to induce an
inference of its constitutionality?
On what grounds did he advocate the meas
ure2
By answering the above, you will confer a
favor by referring to or citing authority on the
subject.
Yours, truly, An OLD SUBSCRIBER.
In the beginning of the year 1919, bills were
introduced in the House of Representatives, to
authorize the Territories of Alabama and Mis-
souri, to form State Constitutions. February
18th, Mr.. Tallmadge, of New York, moved to
insert clause in the Missouri bill, prohibiting
the further Introduction of slaves into Missouri,
and granting freedom to the children of those
already there, on their attaining the age of
twenty-five. After a fierce debate, this was car
ried-yeas 81, nays 76.
Mr.. Taylor, Of New York, February l6,
moved a similar restriction as an amendment
to the bill to organize Territorial Government
d
very close vote, and Mr.. Taylor then proposed
to add to the bill proviso that neither Slavery
nor involuntary servitude should thereafter be
introduced into any part of the territories of the
United States, north of 36o 3O>, the northern
boundary of the new territory
This was the first proposition looking toward
the one finally adopted it was made by New
York member, but receiving little favor from
any section, was Withdrawn, and the Arkansas
bill was passed without restriction.
The Senate struck out of the Missouri bill the
amendment made on motion of Mr.. Tallmadge,
and the House refusing to concur, by vote
of rs to &c, the bill was lost.
The rest Of the year, till the new Congress,
was period of as much excitement on the Sla-
very question as now prevails. Henry Clay was
the Speaker of the House in the Sixteenth Con-
gress. Early in the session, committee, on
motion of Mr.. Taylor, of New York, was ap-
pointed in the House, to inquire into the expe-
diency Of prohibiting Slavery north Of the Mis-
.issippi A bill to authorize Missouri to form
State Constitution was postponed till the COM
mttee could report, which, however, being un-
able to agree, was discharged.
In the Senate, after much mannuvring and
hot debate, the admission of Maine and Mis-
souri, was provided for by one bill by vote of
% to Il. Thomas, of Illinois, moved to amend,
by clause prohibiting the introduction of
slaves into any of the remainder of the Louisiana
cession, north of the Arkansas boundary. This
clause, finally adopted, and known popularity
the Missouri Compromise, was carried by
vote of "a to l0-the Senators from Virginia,
South Carolina, Georgia, and Indiana, with
Macon and one of the Mississippi Senator's in
the negative. The bill, February II, 1920, as
amended, was carried-yeas "a, nays 20-the
slsveholding States with Illinois, for it, all the
others against it. When the Maine bill came
back to the House, with provision tackled to
it for the unrestricted admission of Missouri,
and with the proviso of Mr.. Thomas, both
amendments were voted down, the proviso, by
l5S to l8-eight of the latter from the South,
ten from the North. The House then passed
its own Missouri bill, with the clause prohibit |
ing Savery-93 to 94-Henry Clay laboring
hard, but in vain, to induce it to make the clause
merely recommendatory.
A Committee of Conference was asked by the |
Senate, and Mr.. Clay, who was in favor of the |
Compromise of Thomas, took care to appoint
a decided majority of compromises Meantime
the Senate sent back the Missouri bill of the |
House, with the prohibition of Slavery stricken |
out, and the Thomas proviso inserted. We COPY |
an account of what followed, from Hidreth's
History, Up. l9l, vol. 3d. which presents |
Compromise:
At the same time, March 2,) Holmes, from
the Committee of Conference reported a recon.
mendation to the Senate to recede from their
amendments to the Maine bill-the House to
pass the Missouri bill in its new shape Steps
had been taken to secure the adoption of this
recommendation. Four more obscure Northern
members-Eddy of Rhode Island Stevens of
Connecticut, and Kinsey and Smith Of New
Jersey-had been in some way prevailed upon
to vote for the Compromise. Three others
Edwards of Connecticut, and Case and Thomp-
son of New York-the latter brother of the
Vice President-absented themselves. By this
detection, the striking the prohibition of Slavery
from the Missouri bill was carried, 80 to 81.
The insertion of Thomass proviso was then
! carried, l34 to 42-the negatives including 35
Southern members, who voted against it as not
within the power of Congress, and five Northern
men, who objected to it as not extensive
| enough"
This was the Missouri Compromised South
secured the point of the organization of Mis-.
| sour, without restriction as to Slavery-the
| North secured the restriction in all the remain
der of the Louisiana Territory, north of
36' 3V. The first idea of the Compromise was
| thrown out by Mr.. Taylor, of New York. The
| Compromise as it was passed was the PROPOSE
ton Of MIR. Thomas, of Illinois. Henry Clay
was its supporter from beginning to end,
and but for his tact and energy, it is not
probable that it would have succeeded. After.
wards, the people Of Missouri, in forming their
State Government, inserted a special clause,
requiring the Legislature to frame laws to pre-
vent free colored people from settling in the
State. This offended the North, and at the
| next session, commenced in November, the ex-
element on the Slavery question was as fierce
as ever. Ii was then that Mr.. Clay appeared
| as the originator of movements intended to al
lay the excitement and settle the controversy
by some compromise. As last resort, all
other measures having failed, Mr.. Clay, Febru-
airy 18th, moved the appointment of joint COM
mittee to consider the whole subject; and this
was carried. The resolution reported by the
committee required solemn pledge of the Mis-
sour Legislature, that the Constitution should
not be construed to authorize the passage of
any act, and that no act should be passed, by
which any of the citizens of any of the States