The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1860-01-26


before Mr.. Monroe, he summoned his Cabinet to-
.gether, and took their opinions; and they gave
their unanimous opinions in favor of the power of
Congress to exclude slavery from the Territories
of the United States. Upon that subject, beg
leave to read an extract from the diary of John
Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State:
- March g. ls2o--when this day TO my Office /
the Presidents House 1t then one and Immediately
went He expected that the two bills for the adms-
Maine and enable Missouri to make Constitution,
would have been brought to him for his signature aud he
had summoned all the members of the Administration ask
their opinions writing 10 be deposited in the Department
Of State upon two questions l. Whether Congress had
constitutional right TO prohibit slavery Territory and
Whether the eighth section of the Missouri bill (Which in
ters slavery forever in the territory north of & degrees
atitude) applicable only TO the Territorial
STATE would extend 10 it after should become State.
the first question: It unanimously agreed that
congress have the to prohibit slavery in the Terrific
sies.n
repeat it, sir, the Cabinet of Mr. Monroe were
unanimously of opinion that Congress had thu
over to prohibit slavery in Territory; and in
,hat Cabinet were William Writ, William H.
crawford, and John G. Calhoun.
Mr.. CHESTNUT. ] think it is due to the men,
Try of Mr.. Calhoun to state what believe 70 be
Known to most Senators, and is according to my
recollection, that upon the floor of the Senate
in response to this charge, made 10y the Senator
rom Missouri, Mr.. Benton, be denied ever having
given such an opinion in relation to the Missouri
compromise. | state that much, as due to the
memory of Mr.. Calhoun.
Mr.. HAMLIN. If my friend from Wisconsin
will allow me moment, will state that recol-
lect very well the denial to which the Senator
from South Carolina has alluded. Mr.. Calhoun
did upon the floor of the Senate. make that de-
uial but also recollect that Senator of this
body at that time, Mr.. Dix of New York, obtain
ed from the State Department what purported to
- I'll
opinions were enclosed The opinions themselves
were not found.
Mr. PUGH. And never have been.
Mr.. HAMLIN. But the envelope was found in
the Department
See Appendix, Note c.
Mr.. PUGH (amoDg other things) said said
the other day, and | have said it many times
here and elsewhere, that was in favor of main
tanning the principle of the Missouri compromise
up to the time that California formed her State
Constitution not that believed it to be consti-
tutiona but it having been tried before the adop-
ton of the Constitution, and having been acQui-
esced in, and being the shortest way to make
peace, was in favor of extending the Missouri
compromise line to the Pacific ocean up to the
time that the State of California formed State
Government. That drove me to the other doc
trine of non-interventiOn and popular sovereign
~. Therefore it is in vain for the gentleman to
cfe the Missouri compromise, or any of its CO.
rollaries.
Mr.. DooL1TTLE. have discussed simply the
question of constitutional power, not of expedi-
ency. / ask the honorable Senator whether, in
his opinion, he can go for anything which is I'M
constitutional, if it is expedient?
Mr.. PUGH. No, sir
Mr. DooLITTLE. discussed the simple ques-
ton of the constitutionality of the power of Con-
gress on that subject, not of expediency.
Mr. PUGH. Does the Senator see no differ
ence between a power of universal prohibition
and power of division? Can he see no differ
ence between an act of Congress that provides
that no slaves shall be taken into any Territory,
and an act of Congress which divides the Terri
tory equally between the slaveholding and nom
slaveholding States? Is it possible that the SEN
ator sees no distinction? If so, despair of en-
tightening him.
Mr.. DooLITTLE. Mr.. President, / was speak
ing of the constitutional power of Congress to
legislate upon and exclude slavery from the
Territories and fit has the constitutional power
te exclude ten slaves, it has the constitutional
power to exclude ten thousand, or exclude them
ALL iii has the power to exclude slavery from
half the Territory it has the power to exclude it
from the whole. | was simply arguing the ques-
ton of constitutional power; and while | admit
that, in reference to some of the Southern Terri
constitutional power do all that it had right to
do, yet it did exercise portion of that power by
way OF limitation, even of slavery, in the slave
holding Territories of the South. On the ques-
ton of power, there is no difference whether we
exclude half or exclude the whole, or from half
or the whole of the Territory.
The bill received the signature of President
Monroe, who thus, upon his official oath, assert
ed and exercised the constitutional power of ex-
Guiding slavery from the Territories.
But let us pass on from 1920, and come down
at once to General Jackson's Administration.
l understand General Jackson to be good Dem
ocratic Republican authority. He certainly was
when belonged to the Democratic Republican
party of this country, although many whom I
now see upon the other side of the Chamber,
standard bearers of the Democracy of to-day,
were not then enrolled within its ranks. | do
not refer to my honorable friend from Alabama,
Mr.. FITZPATRICK. In 1886, Wisconsin was or
ganized as Territory, and this same provision
for slavery restriction was reincorporated in the
bill for its organization; and, to show how little
General jackson and his Administration thought
of this new dogma, that the moment Territory
is organized, Congress has no longer any power
over its legislation, will refer you to some facts
which took place during his Administration.
Che Territorial Legislature of Florida and the
Territorial Legislature of Wisconsin assumed the
power to incorporate certain banking institutions.
During the Administration of General Jackson,
law was introduced into Congress, and passed
both houses and received his signature repeal
ing those bank charters; and it went further, and
declared that no Territorial Legislature should
have power to incorporate bank without the
consent of Congress. This shows what he thought
of this idea that Territories, from the moment
they are organized, become sovereign, and indie
Of of Such
idea was never dreamed of by the Democratic
party in its better days.
But again, sir, Iowa was organized in 1888,
during Mr.. Van Buren's Administration, and the
next year, believe, there was an act passed to
alter and amend the organic acts of Wisconsin
and Iowa; and what was that alteration Up
to that time, 1889, the Governor of a Territory
always had an absolute veto on every law passed
by Territorial Legislature The Governor not
only had the right to veto it absolutely, but it
was made his duty if he approved bill to sub
NIT it to Congress, to be approved or disapproved
by Congress before it should take any effect but
in 1899, the Territorial organic acts of Wiscon-
sin and Iowa were amended, and it was provi-
ded that the veto power of the Governor should
be reduced from an absolute veto to a veto re-
curing but two-thirds of both branches of the
Legislature to pass bill over it; but in the
second section of that act it was expressly pro-
vided that
This shall not be construed deprive Congress
OF the right to dapprove of law passed by the said Leg
satve Assembly any Udy impair alter the poloer
Of Congress asOs passed by said assembly"
Where was this new dogma of Territorial SOW
ereignty then? Sir, it had never seen the light
No man of standing in the country had ever dream
ed of it at that time unless it be Arthur ST. Clair
of whom and of whose fate, have already spoken
The power of Congress to control the legislation of
the Territories was an admitted power, exercised
by all Administrations. commended for by all par
ties in this Government from the beginning down
to the period of which / speak. But, sir, stop