Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1858-04-30
House OF Representative, April IS.

plicated Kansas difficulty. through this
prolonged contest question of principle had
been argued, and be had not supposed that
at this late day new question would have
arisen, which had never been even alluded
to in all the controversy question which
at one time. thirty years ago, came near shat
teripg to pieces the Corfederacy, and wac
then settled on great considerations by the
conference of toe greatest minds that ever
cast their light upon the Constitution OF the
United States. The Conference Committee
had again raised this old question, ana call
ed upon them now to determine 1t. HIS dit
fculty was not that this bill did not submit
the Lecompton constitution to vote OF the
people; be cared not whether the vote was
t. be uuon the constitution, upon admission,
or upon the land grant so long as all ne had
contended for was in it, namely, that the
peopls should have in their hands the power
to say by majority, that ;hey do not choose
to accept that form Of government. Ii that
had been the only content Of the bill, 1t
should have had his sanction. lie believed
the Lecomp ton constitution was the work OF
a small majority, but it the people OF Kan
sas, directly OF indirectly, willed it to become
the law of the land, it did not lie IN HIS
mouth to object. Those who rested their
views here bad right to g to the country
ADD say, with whatever conditions 1t was
hampered, and over whatever broken rag
ments of the constitution it WAS carried,
still the bill carried with it great and glo-
rious triumph of the right of the people
to have final, conclusive say as to their
form OF State government But he bad some
strong State rights opinions. learned in the
school of Henry Clay and VIM. Pinkney, of
Maryland, an upon every Southern hastings
suce he was hoy: and be firmly believed
in the equality Of the States to come into the
Union upon equal terms. This was the doc
trine avuwed by every Southern man. and
the repeal of the Missouri compromise was
based upon the ground that it invaded that
great great principle. But this bill did d.
rectly invade the sovereignty Of the State,
stripping it of one OF its sovereign powers by
an ordinance.
Mr. REAGAN, Of Texas, inquired if the gen.
tIemau did not oppOse the repeal OF the Mis-
souri, compromise:
Mr. Davis was glad the gentleman had
called attention 20 this point, as the state
ment Involved q historical error Gs to what
the Missouri compromise was. The com.
promise proceeded only upon the assump.
ton that there could be q restriction upon
the power of Territory while it remain
ed a Territory, and no longer; and MIR.
Monroe gave the bill his sanction only at.
ter consultation with his Cabinet, aud be-
ing satisfied that the restriction did not
reach beyond the Territorial condition. The
point 10 controversy was as 10 whether Con-
gress had power 10 imp0sea condition upon
a State, and by rhe adoption OF the COM
promise it was decided in the negative.
By this bill there was but one question
submitted to the people OF Kansas, and that
was whether they would, as "a condition OF adj
mission into the Union, accept this ordinance
or stay out of the Unlon. Similar ordlran-
ces had been proposed to other States, but
never before since the Missouri compromise,
had it been made condition OF admission.
Previous to that time, some condition had
been i'm posed in eua bling acts rs In the ca
ses of Louisiana and Mississippi; but after
the settlement of the question in the case OF
Missouri, that Congress had no power to IN
pose conditions, i, had never been attempted
Grants of land had often been made 90 con-
dtions but if the conditions were not com
piled with, only the land was lost, and there
was no penalty of scusion. 10 the Crltten-
dem NJ untgomery bill, there was land grant
on conditions, but the acceptance or :eJec.
ton of the grant was one thing, and the ques-
ton of admission was another and entirely
distinct.
In the Lecompton ordinance, the right
of the State to tax Government lands
was asserted. That assumption was u
nudity; but the power Of the State to tax
lands within its limits, not belonging to the
United States, was prerogative OF DER
sovereignty which this bill attempted TO re-
strain. If they could restrict the power to
tax lands, they could prohibit poll-taxes or
taxes upon personal property. By cond-
ton of admission they could regu late the
whole State system, for the principle could
not stop short OF all claimed by the most
extreme men Of the North.
Congress had no constitutional power to
prohibit Ia xatioD Of the lands OF individuals,
and the bill was therefore Unconstitutional
when it provided that in no case shall nop-
resident propretors be taxed higher than
residents" The United States was not n nom
resident proprietor, because 1t existed every
where, where its sway extended. Ii might be
right or wrong to tax nonresidents, but that
was purely question OF State policy, for the
State to decide They might dss:re to pre-
vent their lands from falling into the hands
of Eastern spectators. or they might Wish
70 prevent a system OF absGDteeIsm. This
precedent would reverse the traditional policy
of the South, aud break down the barrier
against other conditions far more offensive
and injurious to the South. lie represented a
slave State, deeply and profoundly interested
10 the institution, being border Safe, and
losing many more negroes by the non-eX"cu-
ton # the fugitive slave law, than S,uth
Carolina; and be entered his solemn protest
against the surrender Of this cherished prln-
ciple of the South, that all new States come
into this Union upon an equal footing with
all the originisl States.
Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia, was surprised
at the ground upon which tn" gentleman
from Maryland based bis opposition, though
not at all surprised that be should oppose the
bill. TWAS the first time be had ever known
that gentleman to be q champion OF State
rights. The gentleman had challenged the
advocate, of the bil! to show precedent by
which State was shorn OF her right of tax
ing non residents; be would begin with Lou
isiapa.
Mr.. DAVIS reminded the gentlemen that
he had snnken of nrecedeuts since the Mis-.