ONE DOLLAR PER ANNUM, INVARIABLY IN ADVANCE,
TOWANDA:
Sutnrban fUorninn, -ftbrncinj 9, 1858.
glissonri (Jimtpnmtist, (ft.
Remarks of Messrs. Grow,
QUITMAN A T. L. HARRIS,
h the Ihnise, Jan.ldih and 19/A,
On the Missouri Compromise, and the Responsi
bility for the Organisation of the House.
Mr. GROW said : Mr. Clerk, I have re
frained from participation in the debates of this
Hall until an organization of the House should
be effected, and I do not now propose to say
anything in reference to the legitimate legisla
tion of the conutry until the attainment of that
result. But as to the responsibility for the or
ganization of this House which has been raised
here this morning. I propose to say a few words.
The responsibility should rest ou those who
have produced the state of things we fiud iu
this Hall and the conutry. It is not a ques
tion of figures or votes, whether this or that
:::aa could have been elected by transferring
votes from this or the other candidate.
What has produced the present state of
thing- ? Mhy cannot this House organize ?
At the ojieuing of the last Cougress, peace
reigned iu every quarter of the country, aud
nen came here from every section with frater
nal feelings. There were no disturbing ele
c,oils to jar the universal harmouy of senti
ment. " The dead past had buried its dead."
Trie hitter controversies of previous years had
e ,>ed. and sectional quarrels were for the time
No note of discord was heard in
:ut councils of the nation, ami the future was
u 'on ded and bright ; yet, in violatiou of good
f;-. :h. mutually pledged by the representatives
of the two great jkdiiical parties of the eoun
• to resist the further agitation of the sla
very questiou in Congress or out of it,"' a time
! :vd compromise between the two seotious
of the Union was trampled under foot, thus
under the sanction of the Government,
i vi>i territory to the introduction of slaverv,
■ u w .ich our fathers agreed that it should
-ever excluded. Upon the men, nnd the
. oce thai secured its abrogation, rests the
• - i<; •.hty for our want of organization at ;
: * time.
1; declared here, as a reason for the re
that compromise, that it was nccessarv
take the question out of Congress. The ef
" ' *..ke it out has been a civil wariuKan
- • u. i a sectional strife unparalleled in the
yof thi country. Such is the result thus
the attempt to take the questiou out of
t ; and the restriction iu Minnesota
4 5. Oregou still remain.- a boue of contention .
• a future day. When the repeat of the
M as mi compromise was urged on the ground |
;; would quiet agitation, and take this !
v.o:: out of Congress, 1 declared ou this
that
fa.** *Uo nuke t'.i- (feciAratMa with so irueh sr>u..- '
sincerity either Ac n.t unJer-UtJ the rrn ntimeat
\ <rth. er thev fa;.'i-.-mcvehe?:.} :h, -enrs^-
.MAH Mi"ii. st, )iie Are rutnt I'j'eo iu<! tsnninc I
s tvuae cut- whwh were afrtwdy -Jn Uerevi. and. § j
• would lute buried tiwao* : !Tes forever in their 1
a- A., earlrud oa-LuiS inerd ol this Aiitann-Vrsttion.
' it of this Mil ; f.jT its passaxe will, ii my J
- -.-.re. evo-vj 4 niht.aa *nti-Adm:nfctrvtt--n
Iti* MXt 'tu-re-s. A ah earnest aihl devoted
- rati party la which l hmchwM(f
v-t e*' rev- fr 'in my earliest political act ion. I
" " lAibBl ; for its fwmmae will liliaM—l
>r -.Li-Aation. and tearing but* wreck ia eve- >
" Hwa •>n!y va history. Asa lover
-- oy. awl fratacnal eoaomvl aoi->n|t the ciU
vdt racy. suxi as a devotee at the .-hrine of
l- precious hopes ; man, I de-ire the
- : !or it- |<a.t.tv will Sear >;EI
"C rate -j ir.l- already phreusied. <xi
■> hii h onites the tw secti a of the
• • '• i-uader. ar.d year- of alk-r.it.em and
- ~iy •• terrene before" it .an be re-to red. if ex
" " - teaavJty and -treugth."
8* history has made those remarks pro
v ' c though it was but the natural result of
- •.* -at.ou. The responsibility for want of
"vs: tanon of this House is ojon those
,v ' ff-Wic.l this agitation. Ydu trampled
* fair arrangement between the two sec
• '• - I aion ; yon trampled on your own
ren :n the conventions as.-em
" ba t.ra re in 18oi. Yet scarcely a
1 s-. <Sa|-cd before the question was re-
Congress. Wounds were torn open
4 *i just <>aled ; and to-day we find our
• ~ <bt of this gwvji revolution.—
* heads, then, of those who trampled
*' "oatjact* of good faith be the re
the records of vote* here yon can
Jxt ;aKs< anybody is responsible for
iy. o- orgaaixatiou. Did not the tren
fiosi \ djaiua, [Mr. WALKS*. 1 the find
s vcon. protsese to the Deroocra
'* o parties unite, ami elect a (what
*: aapiwal iran Speaker ; are not the
-r raea who vote for Mr. RTCHARIV
.e because they did take that jiro
bv the same line of argument pur
®y friend frota Alabama, [Mr. Hots
nainly are. Rut I do uot hthi
lr . T ~ vtibiiitj ou such grounds.—
f ~ stand here by their principles. It
* tie cxnt vman from Ohio. (Mr.
ojald ..are been elected, if all the
-1 • had voted for him. For
* Mr RISKS wa* within three of an
of those who voted for oth
i-T" '°r hi.a, be would now hare been
<r . c-c transfer the respoosi
*you please by taking the vote*
* 1 re\ord. because combina-
- i*r< by
V ;v " a ild have b*eo effected.—
v - '1 -* figured out of the vote of
* ®' n aud the same could be
IVmocnua aud Americans.
I , T> *! that those Toting for Mr.
I ' c.ange tle ir jioaitioo, because
f T ttUk . r • few votes. Nor
M. , " tfcat ttxw votug for Mr
"ft; -- ticir ground, because by so
' ■, j • ec re a few more votes. Those
t ber r *t the urn* resisted the re
• ■" .oojfHoio-Jse, auu were op-
THE BRADFORD REPORTER.
posed to re-opening the slavery agitation. We
were borne down then, but our views of the
justice of that measure have not changed.—
What was wrong when enacted never ceases
with mc to be a wrong.
BATCRDAT, January If, 1*56.
Mr. QUITMAN. I intended yesterday to
take the tioor for the purjiose of making a few
remarks iu reply to those which fell from the
gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. GROW,]
who last spoke upon the subject of the respon
sibility of the several parties for the failure of
i this House to organize ; but I refrained from
! doing so in the hope that some other gentle
tuau would have done it. Bat, there were
some expressions that feil from the gentleman
from Pennsylania, in the few eloquent remarks
that he made to the House, which I thiuk it
my duty to animadvert upon. He traces the
cause of the failure of this House to effect an
organization, not to what has occurred during
the present session, bnt he goes back to the
passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill as the
cause of the hostile feeling between the differ
ent sections of the Uniou which to-day produ
ces the disorganization of this House.
The gentleman does not go far enough back.
Is it, sir, the passage of that bill which has
given to ail portions of this country their equal
rights iu this Coufederacy—is it the passage of
that bill which has produced this state of feel
ing between the different sections of the coun
try • If it is, then the gentlemen who concur
with him have taken the bold position that
they will deuy to a large portion of this coun
try their cotmuou, equal, constitutional rights.
If this is the positiou gentlemen occupy, we
from the minority section of the Uuion would
be glad to kuow it. But. sir. what is the Kan
sas-Nebraska bill t What is it but a recogni
tion of the principles which underlie the Con
stitution of the United Stales ?—the right of !
all the States in their Federal capacity, and
the rights of the citizens of the respective
States to an equal participation in a country
which w as acquired by their common blood and
treasure—not less by that of the people of
the South thau that of the people of the
North.
But gentlemen are mistaken. They do not
travel back to the sources ef that angry feel
ing which exists between the different sections
of the Union, when they stop at the passage of
the Nebraska bill by the last Congress. That
was not the cause of that hostility of feeling
which uow prevents the organization of this
House. That was out the original cause why,
at the present time, we find the two sectious
of the country arrayed against one another. I
will tell gentlemen what the cause is. The
cause has oficrated for more than a year. It
made its apjiearauce ou this .floor iu IMS, and
was ouly quieted for a time by the compromise
of 1820- It broke out afresh iu 1835. It is
to !e found in that spirit of aggression upon
the institutions o{ the South which comes from
a {icrtiou of that section of the country which
the gentleman [Mr. Gfeowj represents. The
South has ever stood by the guarantees of the
Constitution ; she has adLered faithfully to
the system of goverumeut under which we live.
She has never undertaken to make any encroach
ment upon any State rights, or upoo any indi
vidual rights of the citizens of the North". Not
so with the North. Upou the application of
Missouri for admission into the Uaioniu 181)),
site evinced her disposition to exercise her j>o
litieal powers to prevent the increase of slave
holding States, and to deprive the South of
her just rights to a participation iu aii the bene
fits of the Uuion. The jioiitical strife which
grew out of that controversy threatened the
dissolution of the I n.on. It resulted iu a com
promise unjust to the South, but which she was
compelled to accept. Tue result of that strug
gle. thus terminated, quelled agitation for a
time It soon rose again with fearful violence,
ami has been continued ever sisce.
But the gentleman traces back the cause of
this sectional hostility one year only. Let me
tell hiia that, twenty years ago, when I had
the honor to send in an executive roese-ag? to
the liCgislat'jre of Mi.vsisspjW. I deemed in pro
sier to call the aiu-nt.ou of the Legislature of
that State to the aggressive movements in the
northern States. Could I have procured that
document, I would read extracts fr•_>* it to
show the truth of my remarks. The South
has ever since complained of this intermeddling
of the North with her institutions. Vet it has
continued without iptennissiou ; it is the agita
tk>u which that gentleman, and those who co
operate With him, has raised that has produced
this fetrhng between the different sections of
this eouutry, ami uot die passage of the Kan
sas-Nebraska bill ; that was the result, uot the
cause. ,It is not because the Kansas-Nebras
ka bill has taken away a single right from the
North, but it is because it has performed a
constitutional duty South ; because it
has giveu to the sao- rights which
we aekuowiedge are possessed by the people of
the North. Let the gentleman, then, when he
attempts to trace causes, go back to the soarres
of this state of feeling, and he will find that it
is upon you. northern men, the responsibility
of this state of things lies—upon you, who hare
stirred up this sectional agitation, you who
seek to deprive sovereign Slate* of their feder
al aud con-titutioual rights. \Y hen you attempt,
then, to trace it back, go to its true source.—
Iu the future of our country, if it should bap
peu that the glorious system which our fathers
hare transmit led to us should fali and tumble
into ruia. the verdict of posterity ami history
will be to condemn the agitators of the slave
ry question as traitors to the Coastitutioa and
to the equal constitatioaal rights of a portion
of this Uuiou. There, sir, 1 trace it, and
there posterity wili trace it, and wili not impute
it to the action of the last Congress in doing
what was nothing but mere justice to the
South.
Geutleroea tell at here, graaciously. that
they are not disposed to invade our rights of
property within the Slates. I do not thank
thcui for that. Let me tell them here oo this
floor—uuougk myself burn uorth of Masoc and
Dixon's line—that that is not all we desire
No, sir ; we desire more. We desire thecom
i lu-.ni bcuiSts vf liiii system o Uovcrnniuit
PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY AT TOWANDA, BRADFORD COUNTY, PA., BY E. O'MEARA GOODRICH.
We are not content that that great interest.,
whose existence in onr section of the conn try
has constituted so important an element of
your prosperity as well as of ours—that sys
tem which God in his infinite wisdom has per
mitted to be built up in our country to pro
mote, foster, and carry forward its great desti
ny—should meet a mere tolerance at yoar hands
in the States iu which it exists. No, sir ; we
would be eraren, we would be traitors to our
constitutional rights, if we did not ask of you
what we hare a right to demand—the benefits
of the great system of government which your
fathers und our fathers established. We de
maud it. We demand its benefits as well for
our property as for yours, within the legitimate
sphere of its action. We will not be content,
we ought not to be content, with anything less.
We are willing to meet you here as indepen
dent and patriotic men, aud stand as equals
upou a level, face to face and eye to eye ; but
we do not intend that you shall be our supe
j riors—that you shall reap all the advantages
of onr common Government. We want its
benefits also, and we insist upon them. You
deprive us of most of our constitutional rights
when you refuse to us all and every of the
blessings which those institutions were intend
ed to secure to all the citizeus of every State. !
Do not be mistaken ; let not gentlemen deceive
themselves with the idea that we are asking
from their bounty mere tolerance of our insti
tutions in the States. We demand all ou; con
stitutional rights—l say, we demand them.—
[Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. GROW : The gentleman from Missis- j
sippi [Mr. QrmiASj complains of remarks made
by me yesterday, and refers the agitation which
exists in the country at the present moment
back to the year 1835, instead of to the repeal
of the Missouri compromise. In Its 19, gentle
men say. Very well. Sir, whether the Mis
souri compromise was constitutional or not—
whether or not it was a violation of your con- |
stitutioual rights under this Government—your
fathers agreed with our fathers, ou the fit'h of
March, 1820, that they would give up that
constitutional right—if they had it—and that
slavery should be forever after excluded from
the territory north of the line 3G deg. 30 min.
Of the one hundred and three gentlemen who
then represented the South in this House and
in the senate, but forty-six voted against this
line. Among the number who sustained it was
your own immortal CLAY. He declared in the
Senate of the United States, in 1850. " that
a majority of southern members sustained that
wrong—himself amoug the number."' Whether
its passage was or was not a violation of a
constitutional right, it was '"a fair bargain,"
and good faith required that it should be olv
served. Bv it rou consented voluntarily to re
linquish ali right to carry slavery north of the
line of 3 deg. 30 miu. ; and after availing
yourselves of all the advantages secured by that
arrangement to you. after converting every
foot of territory sontli of that liue into slave
territory, you came here, and by force of num
bers struck down that bargain which your fa
thers made, and w'.ieh was religiously observ
ed for over a third of a century.
Mr. QUITMAN. Do you assert that Mr.
Oi vv vuted for the Missouri Compromise
liae ?
Mr. GROW. Ido assert that Mr. CLAY
says he voted for the line of deg. 30 miu.
Mr. HARRIS, of Illinois. lie never did
SUV so.
Mr. GROW. And that a majority of south
ern members iu the House ami in the Senate
voted for it
Mr. BOWIE Mr. CLAY has stated that
he did vote for that line ; he was not pre
sent, bat he thought that if he had beeu he
would verv likelv have done so.
Mr. GROW . I refer to a sj>eech made by
Mr. CLAY iu the Senate of the United States
on the 6th of March, 1850, in which he says
that " iau>*g '■ u xch> og r >v<i to tk.it Unt t rrre
a moiority of sonlk'rn mrmbrrs" and that " I
hart no rmrtkiy donht that I voted n mmmon
Kilk m* OJker southern friends for lie adoption
of tkr Hme of 36 dtg. 30 ■)." That is the
language of Mr. C I_\Y, in 1850. in the Senate
of the United States And. althorprh he can
not speak today with living voice, be does
sj>eak through the records of his country ; and
i tra-t that no tuan will stand here to contra
dict his own declaration.
Mr. HARRIS. Will the gentleman allow
me to interrupt him ?
Mr. GROW. No, I cannot now
Mr. 11A KRIS. The geatieman <lares a con
tradiction of tle statement that Mr. CLAY VO
! ted for the line of 36 deg. 30 tnin. I wish to
j furnish a contradiction.
Mr. 11 ROW. Yon may do so when 1 get
j through.
Mr. II ARRIS. A"on challenge a cootradic
. tion. and I wish to make it.
Ms*. GROW. No. sir, I only refer to the
won'. One word now in reply to the charge
, of northern aggressious upon the Sontb. made
by the gentleman frotn Mississippi, Mr. Qrrr-
MAV.J for whom 1 entertain the kindest feel
ings ; and the remarks I may make I trust will
not be considered as in any way reflecting per
sonally upon any southern man. We expect
men coming here—reared under the influence*
which surround tberu—impressed with the in
fluences of the societj in which they lire—to
j hold views upon slavery differing from ours.—
With that we find no fault ; but we claim the
right to hold the wentiment? inculcated by the
education of our chiklbood and isfioences which
have surrounded our Live*, and that we shall
be allowed to express them here or elsewhere
with the same freedom as a southern man ex
presses his. without being disfranchised there
for under this Government.
Mr, what are the northern aggressions that
the gentleman speaks of ? Let me say to the
gtaWMB
Mr. QUITMAN. (interrupting.) I desire
to ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania this
qoesttoc ; whether be himself was not elected
as a member of thi* House oo the principle
of hostility to the inatitauoua of the southern
States-
Mr GROW Bir. I hoW no " hostiSty® to
the institutions of the southern States, but
j -uaii rtaiM toe effort now miiit: to ctuage
" RESARDLESS OF DENUNCIATION FROM ANT QUARTER."
the construction given to the Constitution by
onr fathers, and the action of every branch of
the Government for over sixty years. If any
one thing more than another secured my re
turn to this House for the third time, by the
unanimous vote of my district, it was no doubt
because I had stood upon this floor, and resis
ted the repeal of the Missouri compromise.
But, let me say to the gentleman from Mis
sissippi, that political Abolitionism in the
North—paradoxical as it may seem—is the
child of the South. You nurtured it in infan
cy, when too feeble to stand alone j aud yon
have made it strong in manhood by the inju
dicious and nnjnst legislation of this Hall.—
Wbru the North petitioned this Government
to take steps iu reference to the institution of
where it is couceded to be solely under the ju
i risdiction of Congress, yon passed the tweutj-
rule, denying a great constitutional right
to freemen under this Government. That in
augurated jHilitieal Abolitionism in the North;
and from that day to this the warfare has been
one of constitutional rights, not for the South
alone, but for the North. In resisting the re
opening of this agitation in the last Congress,
by a repeal of the Missouri compromise, I took
occasion to say that—
" Previous to tiiat time [. t. the of the twenty
first rule] Abolitionism was but a sentiment, aud a mere
sentiment is not a sufllrient Isv-i- for a formidable politi
cal organization; but >rrvat principles of cou-titutionai
risht are violated in the legislation of the country. leiri-U- I
live acts combining with* strong and universal Sentiment
may form enduring organisation.-. And the sentiment of
the North, in reference to slavery, being deep and gener
al, when you force up legislative "issues to Combine with
it, then become* a formidable element."'
You then placed a censorship over the mails
of this country like that placed by Louis Na
poleon to-day over the press of France ; and
in this country, where we claim that intelligence
should circulate as free as the air we breathe,
you empowered your jiostmasters to declare
what is incendiary, and to withhold such mat
ter from the white freemen of the South. You
placed upon the records of your country, thro'
your Secretary of State, JOHV C. CAIJIOIN—
a man whose memory I revere for his purity
of character aud integrity of {>uq>oso —one of
the brightest and purest intellects that the
country ever produced—you put, I say, upou
! the reeords of the country, through him, a jns
: tificatioo of the annexation of Texas, on the
ground that it would uphold and support the
institution of slavery : and you asked northern
men to indorse that issue, made in our State
}>apers. Aud iu the last Congress, you struck
down—as 1 stated iu the opening of tuj re
marks—a fair bargain, made by your fathers
with our fathers, and which had lieeu religious
ly observed by them for more thau a third of
a century.
Mr. QUITMAN, (in his seat.) Yourobbed
us of California.
Mr. GROW. The gentleman says that we
have robbed you of California. How is that?
California came to Congress and asked to be
admitted as a State of this Union. Your Go
vernment had neglected to give her a Govern
ment, and she was forced to fall baoi njxm
the inherent rights of men to take care f them
selves.
Mr. QUITMAN. Why not extend to Cali
fornia the compromise line ?
Mr. GROW. lam coming to that present
ly. Tiie jHHiple of California—iu the exercise
of what is called popular sovereignty, and
which was iu this case really so, lecause the
people were forced by the neglect of the Go
vernment to rely entirely on their inherent
rights—formed a Government, and excluded
slavery. And what did you do ? The appli
cation of Caiifornla for adinissiou iuto the Un
ion was resisted from the first ; and on the
Joariiil of the Senate of the United States is,
to-day, a protest of ten southern Senators
against the admission of California iuto the
Union after the act of admi.vdon had passed.
And woat is the reason these Senators gave
for their r.pjtosition ? liecause her constitution
excluded slavery. 1 will read the language of
their protest.
Mr. HUMPHREY MARSHALL Will
the gentleman from Pennsylvania allow me to
make a suggestion here?
Mr. GROW declined to yieW the floor, and
continued : The reason alleged in this protest
is, " that the bili gives, the sanction of law.ami
thus irojmrts validity to the unauthorized ac
tion of a portion of the inhabitants of Califor
nia, by which an dfecrtarao/unt is m/rdr
csninsi tie pri'jtrrfw of tie After*. slartkolAjug
Slates of tie I own." That was the protest
of ten southern Senators, that the admission
of California, under her constitution, was a
violation of the rights of fifteen shareholding
States.
Mr. QUITMAN. Let me tell the gentle
mac from Pennsylvania that DO southern man
has ever taken the groond of opposition to
the ad mi-won of California oo the groond of
her baring adopted a coustitntion excluding
slavery.
Mr. GROW. I refer the gentleman to the
language of the protest which I have just quo
ted. [Here the hammer fell.]
Mr. HARRIS said : I should not, str.hare
attempted at this time to occupy the time of
tb* House for a moment, had it not been for
the declaration made by the gentleman from
Peuusyivaai*. [Mr GROW,] who. dared any
one to deny what be had asserted. In the fall
confidence that in the denial of that assertion
would be the truth. I ventured a denial at the
time. The statement made by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania was, that Mr. CUT was
the supporter of the Missouri line of I>2G,
and he dared any one to deny that soeh was
the fart.
Mr. GROW. Ido not think that I dared
any one to deny it, but I appealed to toe re
cord for the truth of lUJ assertion.
Mr. HARRIS. Well, whether the gentle
man did or not, his words are taken by the re
porter*. and their record will show how the
tact is.
Mr GROW. Very weU ; let that deter
mine it-
Mr HARRIS. Bat I want to say a few
words in connection with this question, and to
of the challenge which the rent terra n
ha* thrown out to the Hon* I state here in
u; ptaec. !uu; '. JC rvii.;":s wist a treeus
man made, that Mr. CLAY favored the territo
rial restriction, is not correct. What does the
record show ? In the first |lace I read from
the 17th volume of Nile's Register, jioges 174
and 175, as follows :
" W'ednesday, January K, (1850.) After other bwdness,
the Houae went into Committee of the Whole (Mr. Bald
win in the chair) on the Missouri bill.
" The prtmonitiofi nnder consideration was an amend
ment offered yesterday to the second section of the bill by
Mr. Storrs, substantially to alter the limit* of the propon
ed State, so a* to make the M!<Mouri river the northern
boundary thereof—{with the view of drawing, ajloe on
which those in favor of, and those opposed to, the slave
restriction, might compromise their views.]
" Mr. STOKR* rose and withdrew the amendment he of
fered yesterday, arid in lieu thereof submitted the follow
ing :
" And provided further, and it it hereby mrrted. That
forever hereaiter neilher slavery nor in voluntary servitude
(except for the punishment of crimes for which the party
shall nave been dnly convicted) shall exist in the territory
of the United Statet, lying north of the thirty-eighth de
gree of uorth latitude, and west of the Mississippi river,
and of the 'toundariet of the date of Mittouri, at tUab
luhed by thie act: Prowled, That any person escaping
into said TerriPiry from whom labor or'service is lawfully
claimed in any of the States, such fugitive may be lawful
ly reclaimed and couveyed, according to the laws of the
United States in *o.-h ease made and provided, to the per
son claiming his or her labor as aforesaid.
" Ou this motion a debate occurred of a desultory char
acter. Messrs Randolph. Lowndes, Mercer. Bru-h,Smith
of Maryland. Storrs, and Clay, successively followed each
other m debate.*'
Now, Mr. Clerk, here is the only meager
account we find of the character of that de
bate ; but the question here natnrally arises
upon which side of that proposition was Mr.
Clay found. From the position which Mr.
Clay subsequently took in February, in oppo
sition to restrictions uj>on the State, when he,
according to the declaration of the National
Intelligencer of this city, rose and spoke for
four hours in opposition, the House being in
the Committee of the Whole, awl when the
greatest range of debate was allowed, is it
probable that he would have omitted to state
his views in reference to this question of ter
ritorial restriction ? No one can suppose that
for a moment; and the question is, what po
sition did he take upon that question ? The
gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. HUMTORFY
MARSHALL.] who has just taken his seat, has
stated certain matters which may be addnced
collaterally to show what position he took i
upou that occasion. But there is better proof 1
than that—and I take pleasure in bringing it
to the notice of the House, and I wish ft to go
carefully upon the records of the Honse. as a
declaration which I make bv authority.
There is now a gentleman livine in this city,
venerable iu years, having been near fifty
years iu the service of his country, serving her
faithfully, whose word has never lieen ques
tioned, ami never will be—who was present 1
aud heard Mr. CLAY upon both of these occa- J
sious, when he debated the resolutions of Mr.
STORRS and the resolution upou State restrie-1
tion. He took notes of those speeches, as be
tells me, and he authorizes rae to say that Mr.
C LAY opposed all restrictions either ujon ter
ritory or State. [" Who is it r] General
JKSIT. whose authority no man will question. I
He says he heard Mr. CLAY upon this floor
upon both of those occasious, and took notes
of uis remarks. He has now. and he
proposes to give them to the public at & pro-
JK.T time. He says Mr. CLAY <p|osed restric
tion upon both branches of this subject, and 1
that he was opposed to all restriction. Heal
so details the line of arguineut pursued upon
those occasions.
Bat upou other facto of individual recollec
tion. from other notes and memoranda taken
at the time, there can be no doubt as to Mr.
CLAV'S position opoo that question ; and it
was to correct that misrepresentation of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania. and to place
the correction before tne country. that I rose,
and lor nothing more ; and having made the
statements i have, in connection with the re
marks of those gentlemen from Pennsylvania.
I bare nothing more to say.
Mr GROW. I shall sat but a few words
in reply to the gentleman from Illinois. The
effort which he has made to change the record
of the country by citing officers of tle Anaj,
or any living witness, will not, I trust, be ad
mitted here, or hi the country, against the de
clarations of t.be living man, made in the Sen
ate of the United States in his own vindication.
That Mr. Cur was opposed to any restric
tion on the State of Missouri there is no ques
tion. He resisted it from first to last. That
is not the question in controversy. Tbe ques
tion is, whether be was in favor of the adop
tion of the Hne 36 deg. 30 min , north of which
slavery should be forever prohibited: and I
will read an extract from his ovu remarks,
where he himself, on the siith of February,
I*so, gives the history of the whole transac
tion. In that history he clears up the mtsaj►
prehension which existed in the country that
he was the originator of that proposition.—
That fact he denied. In that speech be re
viewed the controversy, stating his connection
with it. I did not claim that he was in favor
of a restriction on the State, but that he wa
in favor of the line of 36 deg. 30 rain. and
that a majority of southern men supported it.
And what is the record ? Mr. CLAT savs :
w every ;n-4aaoe. preheated si*
w-k SaaliT ajtrtwl Rt
> uw oceam to my. Uau amomz thewe wW axm4
to tte tea. nrt mq/orUq ef member m."
** Mr friend from Akobewa ta tar Sraair IMr Kin* 1
Mr. frnw Marrl-d and . tte2tfo
era, B*Wr> is UtL- bodr. voted in Savor V the ir* M J6®
: aai majority of Or anehm m the other
M the head of vhora was Mr. Uaito huaoaif. rated afce
for last tee. 1 hare m J m'r that /dad ate*.
- Bet . as I ww Speaker of the How*, cad x the Jacr
nai tee. ao thaw wbvs w* the Speaker te. exrapS
tt U* fa?* af a W. I as TM Abie ta imil with cenamtr
bew 1 KtetS; did vcte : bet / Wrr ao tisrtXix dim. if
I reded. in rvmm. m rte my ether SemUmrm fritmdr, fee Or
****** <f 0* tmt w:
Mr. CI.AT'S own declaration, raa-je by him
self 1 And the summoning of living witnemw*
to contradict brm ran** a question, oot between
me and the witnesses whom TOO maroon, but
a between the declaration of tour
own CL*T and that of TOW witnesses There
I leave you.
I leave the record, then, with the firißr wit
nesses whom you summon to impeach the dec
laration of your own immortal statesman Bat.
the arch;res of VCKIT country comes
t.ie of one of the living actors of
the tiroes, that the South regarded the a3op
t of> of that 'me of 3*> dec S rt aif i-" e tw i r > wpi
CilAKlXf WTXtC fcvW tt - Capitol st
VOL. XVI. XO. 35.
midnight—for it aeema that ail of these slave
ry laws must be passed in the darkness of the
night ; twelve o'clock seems to be the fitting
hour for passing all compromises in regard to
slavery, and for repealing tiietn—at least such
is the history of the country—Mr. PIKCKWKY,
writing from this hall at the dead hour of the
night, in 1820, says :
" DKAB Brn : I hasten to inform yon that this moment
we have carried the question to admit Uhnonri uxltoll
Loaiifiana to the southward of 88° 30". free of the restric
tion of iiitwy, and gine the Sooth an addition of six and
perhap* tight number* to the Senate of the United States.
it U considered here hg the ataeehatding State* em a GREAT
raicara."
It was considered by the South at the time
as a great triumph. And yet men stand here
and tell us that it was forced upon them by the
North. In the Senate of the United States,
on the engrossment and passage of the bill,
twenty Southern Senators voted for it—t**o
only against it.
But four northern Senators voted for that
line— eighteen against it. Bat two southern
Senators voted against it—twenty for it.—
Among the latter were both Senators from
Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, Ken
tucky, Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, and
Delaware, with Mr. STORKS, of North Caroli
na, and Mr. GILLIAM, of South Carolina—leaf
ing two against it.
Now there is another part of this letter of
Mr. PICKSEY'S, which is testimony contempo
raneous with the passage of that compromise
which has been so ruthlessly stricken down :
" To the north of M- 30' there b to be. ¥y the present
law. restriction, which, yoo will ** by the rotes. 1 voted
against. But it i* at present of no moment. It is a vast
tract, uninhabited only bv savages and wild hem**. In
which not a foot of the Indian claim to soil U extinguish
ed. and in which, according to the ideas prevalent, no land
ojfiee trill be opened for a great length of time."
But when a land office comes to be opened,
yon come here and strike down this restriction
—strike down everything which the North
thought she hsd secured by that arrangement.
The gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. MAR
SHALL] said, in the way of interrogatory, that
I would not agree to extend the Missouri com
promise line to the Pacific. That is trne. Ha
undertook to say, however, that the North had
not been faithful to the compromise of 1820.
Sir, what was the Missouri restriction applied
to ? To the territory purchased of France—
to that alone, and nothing else. It was not
applied to any other territory, for there was no
other to apply it to. Then," has it not been
adhered to by the North in its application to
the territory to which it was applied ? Was
it not put on the statnte book on the 6th of
March, 1820 ; and did it not continue a valid
enactment, withoot change or alteration, till
tle |>assage of the Nebraska bill by the last
Congress ? How then was it abandoned ?
Gentlemen complain that when Missouri asked
to be admitted into the Union, the North ob
jected to her admission.
A MEMBER made a suggestion here as to the
opposition to the admission of Arkansas.
Mr. GROW. No, sir ; Missouri is the ques
tion. The gentlemen rest upon Missouri. Sho
had passed a law, {irobihiuiig the immigration
of free b: ticks ; and the ground of the resis
tance to her admission was, that she could not
enact socii a restriction, anil not that she tol
erated shivery. It was in that compromise
that Mr. CLAY figured as the originator. He
brought in a proposition to hannooiae that
question, and it passed. Bat there was no
question raised, at that time, about the lute of
36 deg. 3') lain., nor at any other time, ao far
as the Lc lisiana purchase was concerned, the
only territory to which that arrangement ap
plied. But when the Government acquired
new territory, to which we were asked to ap
ply that line, we said "no n And why ? Be
cause. while you would hem us in, in our ter
ritorial expansion, by this line on the south
and the British possessions on the north, you
would be left almost indefinite expansion oo
the south. Would it then hare been fair far
the North to have hemmed herself in forever
upon twelve and a half degrees of latitude,
over which to carry free labor and free institu
tions ; while leaving almost indefinite expan
sion to the institutions of slavery ? Besides,
4r, wc had acquired free territoiy—territory
ia which slavery was abolished by the laws of
Mexico—and we were asked to make it, by act
of Congress, slave territory. To such a pro
position I answer tbe gentleman, in the Jan
image of Kentucky's own illustrious states
man, *• I never will vote, and DO earthly pow
er will ever make me vote, to sj>read slavery
over territory where it does not exist."' That
was tbe declaration of your own CLXY, made
on the 6th of March, iSoO. It was almost
his djing declaration, and it will live among
the jroodest legacies that he has bequeathed
to after times. Sir. I stand with htm in declar
•ng that by no act of mine shall slavery ever
be carried into any territory from which it ii
excluded by positive law.
Mr. HCMFURKY MARSUALL. Tbe
gentleman from Pennsylvania will allow me to
say, that Sucre is not a southern Representa
tive on tki.i ftoov who will vote to spread da
very over territory where it does not now exist.
Mr. GROW. Bat the proportion to ex
tend the lfkari compromise tine through the
acqaisitioii of Mexicaa territory was m M
the same thin? It wae sarin*, by Irpiila
tire act of this Republic, that slavery might
exist in vhat Territory. notwithstanding the
laws of Mexico prohibited it. We were ask
ed to strike off all n-stricUom by a positive
legislative act. If slavery had then gone in
to tnat Territory. it woeid hare beeo the act
of this Government, as ia the case of Kansas
now. If abrer> plant it*!f there, who is re
sponsible for U f The taen who struck dowa
that restriction; for. with the Missouri coee
prooriae in force, slavery coekl never bare gone
there. If thee it goes there daring its terri
torial existence, while aoder the jnrisdktkn of
t'oagn&s a is just the same ia effect as if
carried there by joar votes, for joa permit to
be dooe what yon bare the power to prevent.
" Have yon said your prayers, John f
No ma'am It ain't icy work Bit? ears the
prar*r and I the an*Bs ? We served "to do
it because it '-"tees shorter "*