The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1903-04-02
THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE.

! EDITOR NATIONAL TRIBUNE: a Please
advise subscriber what is meant by the
Missouri Compromise" and what its
boundary lines. q, Was the missouri
| Compromise law ever repealed, and. il 50.
| by whom?-NATHAN COLLTSS. Arcoia, Ill.
The Missouri Compromise was the frst
great battle between the Free-Soil and
Pro-Slayery elements which had then be-
gun to coalesce into parties. The Ordi-
nance of 1877 had prohibited slavery in
all the Territories lying north of the Ohio
River between the Alleghanies and the
Mississippi River. In 1918 the people of
Missouri wanted to form State and sent
a petition to Congress. Slavery then ex-
listed in the Territory by virtue of its in-
PRODUCTION by the French and Spanish.
Feb. Is, 1919, when the House went into
committee of the whole upon the en-
abling act for Missouri. Mr.. Talmatige. of
New York, offered an amendment to the
effect that the future Introduction of
slavery should be prohibited except for the
punishment of crime, and that all children
of slaves born in Missouri after its admis-
sion as a State should be free upon arriv-
ing at the age of %. This brought about
sectional vote, the Northern members
voting for it and the Southern against it,
with the bill passing. The Senate struck
out the amendment, but the House re-
fused TO concur, and the bill was lost Up
to that time there had been one Slave
State admitted into the Union for every
Free State. and it was now proposed to
admit Missouri as Free State in order
to offset Alabama.
The Legislatures of all the Northern
States warmly Endorsed the Tallmadge
ProyisO. and there opened up discussion
which rapidly grew hot over a number of
questions involving principally whether
Congress had any right 10 legislate in re-
gard to slavery in the States and Terri
tories. This dispute continued until Apo
mattox. The argument became so hot as
to threaten civil war. when Henry Clay
came forward with compromise. Massa-
chusetts was to be divided and Maine add
mitted as Free State to offset the ad-
mission of Missouri as Slave State; that
the House should give up the Tallnadge
Proviso, and both should agree upon what
was known as the Thomas Amendment,
reading as follows:
''And be it further enacted, That in all
that territory coded by France to the
United States. under the name of Louis
lana, which lies north of 26 degrees 80
minutes north latitude, excepting only
such part thereof as is included in the
limits OF the state contemplated Dy tnlS
act. slavery and involuntary servitude,
otherwise than in the punishment of
crime, whereof the party shall have been
duly convicted. shall be and is hereby for
ever prohibited.
Both Houses concurred in this, and then
there was trouble in the Cabinet. Presi-
dent Monroe raising constitutional ques-
lions against the prohibition of slavery.
the influence of Calhoun he was
induced to sign the bill March 6, 1920. In
1854 the Supreme Court. in the famous
Dred-Scott decision, denied the constitu-
tionalty of this Missouri Compromise and
the right of Congress to prohibit slavery.
Jan. 23, 1854, Senator Stephen A.
Douglas, Chairman of the Committee on
Territories, reported bill to organize the
Territories of KANSAS and Nebraska, re-
)ealing the Missouri Compromise, and
the purpose of the act to be to
AIRY out the following three propositions
md principles:
II. That all questions as to slavery in
he Territories or States to be formed
rom them were to be left to the repre-
entatives of the people residing therein.
so. That cases involving title to slaves,
II personal freedom, might be appealed
rom the local tribunals to the Supreme
,Ourt: and
80. That the Fugitive Slave Law should
pply to the Territories"
This, which adopted what was after
Tard known as Popular Sovereignty" or
Squatter Sovereignty" passed the Senate
Iarch 3, 1854, by vote of 81 to IA, and
he House May "a by vote of 113 to 100.
he debates were the storuiest ever
nown in Congress, and the agitation all
yer the country intense.