The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-05-25

based. The principles were distinctly sci
forth: first, that the slavery question wat
to be banished forever from the Halls O
Congress, and remanded to the people of The
Territories who were Immediately interested
secondly, that all questions involving the
title to slaves, and matters of personal free!
dom, were referred to the adjudication o.
the local tribunals, with right of appeal to
the Supreme Court of the United States
Here non-intervention was established as ar
invariable rule of action the Territories
were to legislate as they pleased, so that
they did not violate the Constitution and
if they passed any law impairing, or ipjuri
GUS to, the rights of property in slaves, suit
should be brought in the local court of the
Territory, with right of appeal to the
Supreme Court of the United States and
that we would abide the result of such de-
cisions. When the fugitive slave law was
to be faithfully executed and carried into
effect Can any man have an excuse fol-
not knowing that the true intent and mean.
ing of the Kansas. n ebraska act was, that
Congress renounced forever all right or pre-
text for interfering with slavery in the Ter
ritories, either to establish, prohibit, or
protect? Remember, the questions to be
referred to the courts were such questions
as should arise under the territorial enact
ments, and the cases all were to 20 into the
local courts, with right of appeal. Ger
tainly, if gentlemen did not understand the
provisions of the bill, it was not the fault
OF the committee that reported it.
l insist that the terms of the bill are still
more explicit on this point. Having given
notice, in this report, of what we intended
to do, and how we intended to do it, and
for what purpose we put the provision in
the bill itself in language so plain that he
who runs may read, there can be no excuse
for not understanding it. In the fourteenth
section of the bill we provided:
THAT the Constitution and all laws of the
United States which are not locally inapplica-
BILE, shall have the same force and effect within
the said Territory as elsewhere within the Uni
ted States, except the eighth section of the act
preparatory to the admission of Missouri into
the Union, approved March g. 1920, which be.
ing inconsistent with the principle of non inter.
vention by Congress with slavery in the States
and Territories, as recognized by the legislation
of 1850, commonly called the compromise
measures is hereby declared imperative and
void: it being the true intent and meaning of
this act not to legslate slavery into any Terri
tory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but
to leave the people thereof perfectly free to
form and regulate their domestic institutions in
their own way, subject only to the Constitution
of the United States"
There you find several distinc, PROPOSE
lions affirmed in the body of the bill-that
is the provision of the bill which the late
Colonel Benton denounced as being a mere
stump speech; because the drafter of the bill
was careful enough to incorporate the dis
tinct propositions which it was intended to
carry out. We did not mean to leave it in
doubt. In the first place, the principle an
nOunced was that we repealed the Missouri
compromise because it was inconsistent with
the principle of non intervention by Con-
gress with slavery in the States and Terri
tories, as affirmed in the compromise meas
ures of 1850. There is the assertion, that
the compromise measures were inconsistent
with intervention for any purpose; that it
was necessary to establish non intervention,
without any exception or any qualification,
in order to carry out the principle of the
compromise measures of 1850; and we re-
pealed the Missouri compromise merely for
the purpose of applying that principle and
banshiDg the slavery question from Con-
gress, and remanding it to the people of the
Territories. That was the object, the only
object, for which we ever repealed it. Every
Senator who voted for the Kansas N ebraska
bill declared by his vote that non-interven-
ton was the rule in the compromise measures
of 1850. He is estopped from denying it;
and it was we'll understood, at that time,
that we were making an Endorsement of the
principle of the compromise measures of
1850; and we insisted that we would never
repeal the Missouri restriction until we had
that recognition. remember we'll that
when southern Senators, who had opposed
the compromise measures of 1850, came to
me and asked me to strike out the words
"being inconsistent with the principle of
nonintervention by Congress with slavery
in the States and Territories, as recognized
by the legislation of 1850. commonly called
the compromise measures" 1 asked them
why? They told me they had voted against
the measures of 1850, and this seemed to
stultify them, by compelling them to affirm
them. l said, in these consultations, "Y on
have agreed to withdraw your opposition
and acquiesce, and 1 must have it inserted
in the bill, that we repeal the Missouri re-
striction only for the purpose of carrying
out the principle of non-intervention;" and
here are men within the hearing of my voice
to whom these reasons were given. 1t was
considered as rather bitter pill to those
who had opposed the compromise measures
Of 1850: but we insisted that they should
swallow it as the only condition on which
we would pass such bill. We had the
recognition of the principle, and we had the
pledge of honor of every Senator who voted
for the Kansas N ebrasks act, that be would
stand by the doctrine of intervention in
all time to come. The Journal shows it.
We took his bond, and recorded it on the
Journal; it still exists, and will be imperish
able.
What else is asserted?
1t being the true intent and meaning OF
this act not to legislate slavery into any State
or Territory, nor to exclude it therefrom.''
That does not tell what the intent. was
but what was not the intent What was
the intent?
But to leave the people thereof perfectly
free to form and regulate their domestic insti
tutions in their own way, subject only to the
Constitution of the United States
That was the intent. Every man who
voted for the bill declared, on his oath, that
that was the intent: non. intervention by
| Ooro.ooo. ho voo~lo Ii J.