The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-10-05
The "Chase Amendment to the KAN
sas.Ncbraska Bill.

The "Chase Amendment to the Kan
sas-Nebraska Bill.
The Republican stump speakers in this
State unite in adopting the same line of ar
gument in their denunciation of the Kansas
Nebraska bill. They say the bill was a
cheat-a swindle-and that DOUGLAS never
intended that the people should enjoy under
it, the right Of excluding slavery from the
territories. In support of this assertion,
they instance Judge DOUGLAS vote on the
celebrated CHASE amendment. An exami.
nation of the debates in the Senate, on the
Kansas bill, is all that is necessary to stamp
this argument as without even the shadow
OF foundation.
The following is the celebrated fourteenth
section of the Kansas bill, which repeats the
Missouri restriction
"That the Constitution and laws of the
United States, which are not locally inappl.
within the said Territory of Nebraska as else.
where within the United States, except the
eighth section of the act preparatory to the ad
mission of Missouri into the Union approved
March 6, 1920, which being inconsistent with
the principle of non-interventi0n by Congress
with slavery in the States and Territories as re-
cognized by the legislation OF 1850, Common.
ly called the Compromise measure) is hereby
declared imperative and void, it being the true
intent and meaning of this act not to legislate
slavery into any Territory or State, nor to ex.
clude it therefrOm but to leave the people
perfectly free to form and regulate their do.
nestle institutions in their own way, subject
only to the Constitution of the United States.
On the 18th of February, 1854, while the
bill was under debate, Mr.. CHASE, of Ohio,
proposed to insert Immediately after the
words above given, the following: Under
wh,ch (the Constitution of the United
States the people of tile territories, through
their appropriate representatives, may, If they
see fit, PROHIBIT the existence of slavery
therein"
This was the celebrated CHASE amend
ment; but for better understanding of
what occurred, it should be borne in mind
that it was offered as an amendment to an
amendment, and parliamentary law not per-
hitting a proposal to amend beyond this, it
(the CHASE proposition) was not of itself
open to further amendment, unless Mr..
CHASE voluntarily modified his own motion.
In proposing his amendment, Mr.. CHASE
thus stated its" design :"
Now, desire to have the sense of the Sen.
ate upon the question, whether or not, under
the limitations of the Constitution of the Unit
ed States, the people of the Territories can
prohibit the existence of slavery.
Mr.. PRATT, Of Maryland, promptly re-
sponded:
The principle which the Senator from Ohio
has announced as the principle of his amend.
ment is, that the question shall be left entirely
and exclusively to the people of the Terrific
ries whether they will prohibit slavery or not.
Now, for the purpose Of testing the sincerity of
the Senator, and for the purpose of deducing
the principle in his amendment correctly, 1
propose to amend it by inserting after the
word "prohibit" the words Tor Introduce"
so that if my amendment be adopted, and the
amendment of the Senator from Ohio, as so
amended, be introduced as part of the bill, the
principle which he says he desires to have
tested here will be inserted in the bill, that the
people of the Territories shall have power
either to introduce or prohibit slavery as they
may think proper. suppose the question will
DE nrSt taken on the amendment viii h offer
to the amendment.
Messrs. SEWARD and CHASE at once rails.
ed the question that as an amendment
(CHAsE's) to an amendment 1.-THE four
teenth section above quoted was pend
ing, no further amendment was in Or
der; and the Chair necessarily ruled Mr..
PRATT's motion out of order. After some
debate
MIR. Shields said: If the honorable Senator
(Mr. Chase) will permit me, l will suggest to
him, if he wishes to test that proposition, to
put the converse, as suggested by the honora-
BILE Senator from Maryland, and then it will be
fair proposition. Let the Senator from Ohio
accept the amendment of the Senator from
Maryland, for the purpose of testing the ques.
ton.
Mr.. Chase-I was about to state why could
not accept the amendment of the Senator from
Maryland. have no objection that the vote
should be taken upon it, and it is probable
that it would receive the sanction of MAORI.
ty here but with my views of the Constitution
l cannot vote for it. do not believe that a
Territorial Legislature, though it may have the
power to protect the people against slavery, is
constitutionally competent to introduce it.
Mr.. BADGER, of North Carolina, having
called for the reading of the amendment,
said:
Mr.. PRESIDENT: If, therefore, the amend.
ment proposed by the Senator from Ohio were
appended to the bill in the connection in which
he introduces it, the necessary and inevitable
effect of it would be to control and limit the
language which the Senate has Just put into
the bill, and to give it this construction: that
though Congress leaves them to regulate their
pwn domestic institutions as they please, yet.
in regard to the subject matter of slavery, the
power is confined to the exclusion or prohibi.
ton of it. I say this is both the legal effect
and the manifest design OF the amendment.
The legal effect is obvious upon the statement.
The design is obvious upon the refusal of the
what was suggested by my honorable friend
from Maryland, the propriety and fairness OF
which was instantly seen by my friend from
Illinois (Mr. Shields). Is it proposed by the
Senator to test the question whether these PEG.
pie shall expressly have authority to determine
for themselves upon the existhnce of this do.
nestle relation? If so, and the language lust
put into the bill is not sufficiently explicit. in
his estimation, is it not beyond all question
that you should put in the words g or intro.
duce?" Under the bill, as it stands, the PEG.
pie may regulate their domestic relations as
they see fit !; but, says the amendment of the
Senator from Ohio, that shall enable them, un.
der the Constitution, to prohibit slavery. What