Page:The History of Slavery and the Slave Trade.djvu/649

 shall have the same force and effect within the said territory of Nebraska as elsewhere within the United States, except the eighth Motion of the act preparatory to the admission of Missouri into the Union, approved March 6, 1820, which was superseded by the principles of the legislation of 1850, commonly called the compromise measures, and is therefore declared inoperative.'

"Doubtless, Mr. President, this provision operates as a repeal of the prohibition. The senator from Kentucky was right when he said it was in effect the equivalent of his amendment. Those who are willing to break up and destroy the old compact of 1820, can vote for this bill with full assurance that such will be its effect. But I appeal to them not to vote for this supersedure clause. I ask them not to incorporate into the legislation of the country a declaration which every one knows to be wholly untrue. I have said that this doctrine of supersedure is new. I have now proved that it is a plant of but ten da.y's growth. It was never seen or heard of until the 23d day of January, 1834. It was upon that day that this tree. of Upas was planted: we already see its poisonous fruits.

"The provision I have quoted abrogates the Missouri prohibition. It asserts no right in the territorial legislature to prohibit slavery. The senator from Illinois, in his speech, was very careful to assert no right of legislation in a territorial legislature, except subject to the restrictions and limitations of the constitution. We know well enough what the understanding or claim of southern gentlemen is in respect to these limitations and restrictions. They insist that by. them every territorial legislature is absolutely precluded from all power of legislation for the prohibition of slavery. I warn gentlemen who propose to support this bill, that their votes for this provision will be regarded as admitting this claim."

Having thus endeavored to prove that the doctrine that the Missouri compromise had been superseded by the acts of 1850, was new, Mr. Chase attempted to prove it unfounded. Mr. Douglas had charged as a misrepresentation, the statement in the appeal of the independent democrats, that the acts of 1850 were intended to apply to the territory acquired from Mexico only; and that they did not touch the existing exclusion of slavery from what was now called Nebraska. Mr. Chase referred to the report of the committee of thirteen in 1850, which distinctly stated that the compromise measures applied to the newly acquired territory, and he appealed to Gen. Cass, who sat near him, whether any thing had been said in the committee of thirteen, or elsewhere, which indicated a purpose to apply them to any other territory. (Mr. Cass remained silent.) Mr. C. therefore assumed that he was correct; and he proceeded at length in attempting to disprove the assertion of Mr. Douglas, that the Missouri compromise had been superseded. He said:

"But the senator from Illinois says that the territorial compromise acts did in fact apply to other territory than that acquired from Mexico. How does he prove that? He says that a part of the territory was acquired from Texas. But this very territory which he says was acquired from Texas, was first