The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1860-03-29

The facts with which I shall deal this
evening are mainly old and familiar nor is
there anything new in the general use shall
make of them. Ifthere shall be any novelty
it will be in the made presenting the facts
and the differences and observations following
that presentation. ....... .... 4.s...
THE QUESTION DEFINED.
In his speech last Autumn, at Columbus
Ohio, as reported in the New York Times,
Senator Douglas said
sour fathers, when they framed the Government
under which we live, understood this question just as
well, and even better, than we do now" rs--.
fully indorse this, and I adopt it as a
text for this discourse. I so adopt it be,
cause it furnishes precise and an agreed
starting point for discussion between Re-
publicans and that wing of the Democracy
headed by Senator Douglas. Ttsimply leaves
the inquiry "What was the understanding
those fathers had of the question mentioned :
What is the frame of Government under
which we live The answer must be: "The
Constitution of the United States That
Constitution consists of the original, framed
in 1897 (and under which the present Gov
ernmcnt first went into operation, and twelve
. subsequently framed amendments, the first
ten of which were framed in 1889. Who
were our fathers that framed the Constitu.
ton? | suppose the "thirty-nine' who
signed the original instrument may be fairly
called our fathers who framed that part Of the
present Government. 1t is almost exactly
true to say they framed it, and it is altogether
true to say they fairly represented the opin-
ion and sentiment of the whole nation at that
time. Their names being familiar to nearly
all, and accessible to quite ALL need not now
be repeated. | take these "thirty-nine," for
the present, as being "our fathers who framed
the Government under which we live
THE fssUE.
What is the question which, according t.
the text, those fathers understood just as
well, and even better than we do now? 1t is
this Does the proper division Of local from
Federal authority, or anything in the Con
st:tution, forbid onr Federal Government to
control as to Slavery in our Federal Terrific
ries ? Upon this Douglas holds the adirma-
tive, and Republicans the negative. This
affirmative and denial form an issue and
this iSsue-ths questions precisely what
the text declares our fathers understood!
better than We. Let us now inquire whpth-
er the "thirty or any Of them, ever
acted upon this question and it they did
how they acted upon it--how they expressed
that better understanding.
TIE FACTS OF HISTORY.
In 17Si--three years before the Consttu.
tion--the United States then owning the
Northwestern Territory, and no ot!aer--thc
Congress of the Confederation had before
them the question Of prohibiting slavery in
the Territory; and four Of the "thirty nine
who afterward framed the Constitution were
in that Congress, anil voted on this question
OF these, Roger Sherman, Thomas Miiiin
and Hugh Williamson voted for the prohi
bit,on--thus showing that, in their under.
standing no line dividing local from Federal
authority, nor anything else, properly for,
babe the Federal Government to control as
to slavery in Federal Territory. The other
Of the four-James McIIenry against
the pFohibition, showing that, for soma
cause, he thought it improper to vote for it
In 1877, still before the Constitution, hut
while the Convention was in session framing
it, and while the Northwestern Territory
still was the only territory owned by the
United States, the same question Of prohibit
ing slavery in the Territory again came be
fore The Congress of the Confederation and
three more Of the "thirty nine" who after
ward signed the Constitution, were in that
Congress, and voted on the question. They
were William Blount, William Few, and
Abraham Baldwin; and they all voted fol
tho prohibition showing that, in THEN
understanding no line dividing local from
Federal authority, nor anything else properly
I0TDduc t'ic reucTdi NoNSTuuiSiit to CuntTO
as to slavery in Federal Territory This
time the prohibition became a law, being 8
part of what is now well known as the Or
dinance Of 's7. The question of Federal
control Of slavery in the Territories 'ems
not to have been directly before the Con
vention which framed the original Consttu.
ton and hence it is not recorded that the
"thirty-nine," or any ofthem, while engaged
on that instrument, expressed any opinion
on that precise question. In 1879, by the
first Congress which sat under the Constitu
ton, an act was passed to enforce the Ord
nance of 81, including the prohibition o
slavery in the Northwestern Territory The
bill for this act was reported by one of tho
"thirty- y-nine," Thomas Fitzsimmons, then
Member of the House of Representative.
from Pennsylvania. 1t went through al
its stages without word of opposition, ant
finally passed both branches without yeas
and nays, which is equivalent to,a unani
nous passage. In this Congress there wcr,
sixteen Of the 'thirty -nine' fathers VIII,
framed the original Constitution. They
were aU
John Lsngaon, Thos Pi,s.Imn.ens, Richard nassc.