—■=gg^Bgßgg | " 1 jiiae—-s=g i, i m , i, mn THE STAR OFV THE NORTH. I.W. Wttiir ProprtoUr.] Truth aid Right—Gad aid ar Cnitry. ~ [twa 0llars par ia am VOLUME 6. THE STAR OF THE NORTH It published every Thursday Morning, by It. W. WEAVER. 011 ICE—Up stairs, in the new brick building on the south side of Main street, third square beluw Market. TXRMS:— Two Dollars per annum, if paid within six months from the time of sub scribing ; two dollars and fifty cents if aot paid within the year. No subscription re- \ ce.ved for a less period than six months: no : discontinuance permitted un'il all arrearages "are paid, unless t the option of the editor. ALVF.RTIBEMXNTS not exceeding one square wiH be inserted three limes for one dollar, and twenty-five cents for each additional in sertion. A liberal discount will be made to those who advertise by the year. •m il i i • SPEECH OF lion. Ilendrick B. Wright On the Nebraska Bill, delivered in the House of Congress, April 4 th 1854. Mr. WRIGHT, of Pennsylvania, arose and said: I had not designed, Mr. Chairman, to say anything upon the subject of the Nebras ka and Kansas bill. 1 bad made up my mind to vote in favor of that bill, provided the Clay ton amendment be rescinded, and cot to trouble the House with any observa tions upon it But, sir, fortunately or unfor tunately, my disrict adjoins the one whiih is the residence of Mr. David Wilmol, the Mher of the Wilntot proviso, and which is how represented by niy colleague, [Mr. GROW ] Mr. Wilmol has been engaged du ring the pruent week in agitating this sub ject within* e limits of my district, and it tnerefore become me to defend myself. I have not risen to make a charge against any one. lam acting upon the detensive. On Tuesday last a large meeting, or what is represented by the public prints to have been a large meeting, waaAald in the city ot Car bondale, Luzerne is a portion of the district that to rep resent. He made meeting, and the first it was the receipt of three I presented to the House yesterday, signed by one hun dred and four leading and prominent citi zens of that place, asking that this bill may become a law; so that 1 think the impress ion made by Mr. Wilmol in tire city of Car- Dor.daie did not come up to the expectation of the enemies of the bill. Mr. Chairman, as I have already said, I here is one feature in this bill that should be amended. I hope it will be done. I do nol say thai ilshal. be a sine qua noa Willi me that that provision shall be amended ; but I know that I could nol vote for the bill with the clause as it stands, and sustain myself in my district, without great difficulty. I bave lire pledge, however, ol Ihe chairman of the Committee on Territories, that the clause, so far as he is concerned, shall be amended. Mr. WASHBURNK, of Illinois. What clause is that? Mr. WRIGHT. The clause which was changed by the Clayton amendment. If that clause is stricken oat, I am ready to sus tain the bill by my vote in the House, and before the country. 1 ant ready to sustain it because it involves a great, and important, and mighty principle—the principle of Slate rights arid popular sovereignty. Upon that foundation lam ready to stand or fall. 1 say, here, to-day. in rny place in the Amer can Congress, that 1 would rather be stticken down as an advocate of popular sovereignty, then be returned again to Ibis House for hav ing sustained a position hostile to that great priticii'ta- Therefore, so far as regards my return to this House, it is a matter which 1 care not. I reject such a consideration as a natter of no earthly importance. I shall (how this committee that there has never been any portion of territory acquired by this Goverumeut but through the most severe opposition, and 1 might say, almost at the point of the bayonet. There never has been • Territory organized under this Govern nent that has not met with the strongest op position in this House. There has uever been a State organised which, when ma king application for admission into this Un ion, but has met with the same opposition i and to-morrow, If Spain ware to give us dteds of cession of the Island of Cuba, and her Britanio Majesty were to give us deeeds of caaeion of Canada East and Weal, there woold be a party that would vole against ac cepting either, with or with or without sla very , and if they did not vote against ac cepting, it would be in opposition to all for mer precedents in onr history, where the question of organizing Territories has been brought in issue. Ido not know why this is. (do not know why there should be, in this country, even a respectable party that should be opposed to tha acquisition of territory or tha extension of tha area of fraadom. I do not know why it should be ao; but to it it, and such is the undeniable fact. There is BO disputing this fact. On Ihe 23d of October, 1803, the Senate bill to enable tha President of lha United Btales to lake possession of lite territory ce ded to the United States by France passed this House by a vote of 89 yeas and 23 nays. That is, after lha territory had been purchas ed from France, comprising that great valley of the Mississippi, of which tbo French Minister said, when expostulating with Na poleon Bonapart against its cession to this country, that it bad territory sufficient to sup ply fifty millions of human beings with al< necessaries that the wants of man could da. aim- After this territory had been purchas ed and paid for by the Uniied States, either ha money or by their bonds, on the day to 1 here relayed, them wen twenty- BLOOMSBURG, COLUMBIA COUNTY, PA., THURSDAY. APRIL 27, 1854. three gentlemen who voted agaitat taking possession of it. Louisiana waa admitted into the Union on the Blh of April, 1819. Oc the qoeation of the admission of that State, I find, by the reference to the printed JonrnaJa of thie Bouse, that the vote waa 79 yeas and II nays. On the 26tb of February, 182!, the State of Missouri was admitted into lbs Union by , a vote of yeas 87, nays 81. On the 13th ol I June, 1836, the State of Michigan was ad mitted into the Union by a vote of yaaa 133, nays 45. On the 15tb -of June, 1836, the State of Arkansas waa admitted into (be Un ion by a vote of 143 yeas to 50 nays. I have other references hers with regard to the vote of this House, to which, however, 1 shall not direct attention, because it is not necessary to establish the position which I assume in iny argument. Bat I havesbown this committe enough to inform them of the fact that it has made no difference with re gard to the admission of States into the Un ion, or the organization of terrirory There has been that steady, unyielding determina tion on the part of the minority in Congress generally, to resist everything which looked towards the establishment of Territories, the erection of new States, or the extension of the area of freedom. We meet with the same determination here in the bill that .has been reported in this Congress. To-day the argument assumes'this shape ; to morrow it assumes another shape. But there is always an argument, or a pretext of an argument in opposition to the extension of territory. I belong, Mr. Chairman, to the progress ive party in this land. Ido not deny it. I acknowledge it openly, and above board. I do not conceal it. And the man who does not belong to the progressive party of the age, is far in the rear. The destiny of the nation is not confined to its present limes. lis march is onward. The feeling is fully real ized here ; and its influence spread over the whole globe itself. Why, sir, the objection to Ibis bill? Why is it that we hear agitation on all sides of us. The gentlemen from North Carolina who has just taken bis seat, [Mr. CUNGNAN.] has already inlormed this committee that lie en tenanted doubts with reference to the sin cerity of gentlemen, because their position changed as it became necessary to change them in order that lliey might carry out that hostility to the measure which would have a tendency to defeat it. Is there any differ eneff between this bill and the bills that have been heretofore presented with reference to the organization of Territories! The very words of the sixth section of the bill that has been reported by the Committee on Ter ritories in the House were in the bills organ izing Utah and New Mexico. The very words are preserved verbatim. Ann I want here the indulgence of tbecommiitee to te fer them to the sixth section of ihe bill, be cause 1 regard that as the prominent fea ture of the compromise of 1850. The sixth section is in these words ; " That the legislative power of the Ter titory shall extend to the rightful subjects 'of legislation consistent witb the Constitution of the United States, aud the provisions of this act." The Legislative power of the Territory as regards all consistent constitutional legis lation is vested in the people of ihe Territo ry. And these words which 1 have referred to, and read to the commiuee, are the very words contained in the two bills lo which 1 have already made reference—namely Ihe bills organizing the Territories of New Mex ico and Ulah. Well, it is objected, by those who are op posed lo this bill, that there it a repeal of the Missouri Compromise. A repeal of what compromise? Who gave the act of 1820 the name of a compromise? Who gave the name of compromise to an ordinary act of legislation ? The very men called this a compromise, which they have incessantly opposed in Congress and out of Congress ever since the enactment, at different limes nnder different names, but uniform, steady, and persevering at,ill times. And when was that act rf 1820 ever adhered to, either by Congress or by the people of the American nation ? It has been a dead letter npon the statute-book for the last thirty years. In 18. 48, when the Territory of Oregon wa* about to be organized, tbe men who called that measure a compromise voted against its ex tension to the Pacific, upon lbs ground that it was aot a compromise. What power has this body—l speak of the Congress ol the United Slates—to fix any line of demaikation passing over the terri tory of a new State, defining on which side slavery shall or shall not be tulerated ? 1 understand that the Government ta the pro prietor of tha public domain. It may use it in certain ways, and make alt needlul rules and regulations in regard to it. It may make military roads over it. and erect military defenses; but tbe jurisdiction of Ibe territory in the Slates. Congress is a trustee for them only. The faatona ordinance of 1787, dnelared that slavery should not exist north of the Ohio river. The first Territorial Legislature which met under that law, as an organized Territory, enacted laws which provided for the surrender of the slave lo his master, and subjected him letbe dominion of bis will: and that, too, within a free Territory. I bave not the statlue-book, but I can refer this commit'.# to it, which shows that slavery ex isted after tha adoption of that ordinance, north of tbe Ohio river. That ordinance waa treated as a dead-latler, from tbe reas on that both tha law and tha ordinance en oroachad opoo '.ha popolu will. The power which makes • statute ean re peal it. The power which makes a statute exceeding Ihe limits of tha Constitution, makes a statute which is null and void.— This no man will pretend to deny—lawyer or layman. Bat, sir, thare teat a Missouri compromise, as Mr. Niles says in his Register, to wbi oh I refer, but only to a simile paragraph. Mis souri was a party to that compromise. To tha act of 1820 neither Missouri, or any other State or person, was a party, and there fore it was not a compromise. Mr. Niles says, tri hi* Weekly Register of the date Of 3d March, 18211 "The Missouri question is at last settled, so far as it depends upon the act of Congress. The manner of it has not pleased either par ty, and some express the opinion that the Legislature of Missouri will refuse to lo ac cept the condition, but we cannot believe that it is possible." ■- There was a compromise, and the Mis souri was a party tb it. It wan when Mis souri came here asking lo be ad .nitted as a State. She might well have exclaimed, though, in the terms imposed, in the lan guage of St. Paul to the Governor of the Roman Province, "Would that thou wert not almost, but altogether9Bch as 1 am this day, save these bonds." She had upon her statute-book a law pro hibiting the emigration of free negroes with in her borders; and who but the people of ihe State of Missouri was interested in this quesiion ? She was informed by Con. great that this feature must be siricken out before she could be admitted. She yielded. But, sir, she wa* humiliated before the power of the National Government. Sis did oon senl to abandon her own right of popular sovereignty, and struck out this clause.— There was a compromise—a forced compro mise ; such a compromise as power alone dictates to weakness—such a compromise us the superior alor.e has the right to impose upon die interior. But it was, nevertheless, a compromise, because Missouri acceded to it. Rathet than not come into the Union at all, she consented to take the terms of the Government: and Mr. Monroe, the then President Of the United Smtes, issued his proclamation, declaring that Missouri, hav ing complied with ihe requisitions of Con gress, a* contained in the proposition repor ted by Mr. Clay, who was Chairman of the Committee to which the matter was refer red, WHS now one of the sovereign States of the Union. There was a compromise, be cause Missouri was a party lo it as welt as the National Government. But there was no compromise made previous tolhat lime ; and what has been designated as a compromise, was simply an act of ordinary legislation, having no feature about it which could be tortured into a compact of two or more pat ties. It has beer, denied by Statesmen in this country lhat Congress has Ihe power even to organize a territory. I bave read with a great deal ol pleasure and saiitfaciiuri a very able speech made by the honorable gentleman of Ohio [Mr. DISNEY] during the last Con gress upon this subject, in which he takes the ground thai the power is not m Congress according to the language of tha Constitu tion, even to organize a Territory ; and the inference be draws from the argument is, that the power is vested in tbe people of the Territory. That is the view I take of tbe matter. I hold lhat the pioneers who go lo 1 a Territory have the right to settle there, and take with them any property they may choose and lo make their own laws, subjects, how ever, to the constitutional restraints as to their republican character. I ask whether my friend from South Carolina, [Mr. RBETT,] now sitting before me, has not just as rnuclt right lo go into with his property as 1 have to go there from Pennsylvania with my properly ? Slaves in the South are prop erty. We have what we call properly in Ihe North, and there is no bond of mutual un ion if I may go to the Territory of Kansas with my property, and a southern gentle man must at the same time be prohibited from going tiiere with his. Where is the mutuality of such a principle ? Partial would be tbat legislation il Conures* should assume ot rather usurp the power of deter mining what shall and wnat shall not be properly within the limits of a sovereign State. The southern States came into the Union originally when all the State* helJ stave*—each a sovereign government of it self. There was not n State in the Union in 1776 but wa* a slaveholding State. I be lieve that I am correct in regard to that. The Uuion was formed ; the compact was made, and now shall it be said lhat the northern States, after they have abolished slavery from their statute books, blotted it out for ever, shall, in a spirit of dictation towards the southern States, coerce them who were also a parly to the compact J It cannot be; and the people of trie North , with enlarged judgement, with the beoefit conferred on them by common school* and education wherever this question it presented to them in its proper light, must come to the conclu sion that the sensible view is tha only oue that can be taken of any subject, either ol morals, poltiio* or religion. It has been sa>d that it is the friends of this bill who have sought to agitate tbe quesiion of slavery. 1 like to see agitation. I like agitation, for it always resu ure of truth. deny the bill, or those utio the House in tbe same shape— its features of popular ed with other territorial biUa I deny that tha [^endemen^vbo^iaf^rou^r^h^bdlTaiT Congress ate agitators. But call them so if you please. lam willing la agitate on this or any other question whiclislioi ta truth.— There has never been a gram princible set tied in the world but what has been lha re sult ot agitation. There was great agitation at Runnyraeda where the Ceqtmont of Eng land summoned Ktug John ,1o meet dram, and when they rang from him Magna Char ta, the bill of rights, lha bnttwark ol English liberty. There was great agitation (hare at that time—and why! Bscaqoe lha same principle waa involved tbqtjf now involv ed in (he Kansas and ReSr&M biff. There was agitation al the lime theyjtbrew the lea overboard at Boston, and (Me was agita tion at Faneuil Hall. And thro was agita tion in Virginia when Patrick Henry made that great appeal— 'as for me (ive me lib erty, or give me death I" Tiire was agi tation when Jackson put hieb ck upon the Constitution, and his face ag inst the en croachment of the Federal Government, and when, like an old Romar as he was, vetoed ihe United Stales Blah bill, and I Maysville road bill there stagnation then, but il settled a great principle And what was the prinoiple f II waa Congress | had no right to encroach up 4h the power of the Slates and populai iovereignty.— There was a land mark established by Jack son in those two vetoes, which have done more toward the establishment of Slate rights in this Uuion than all giber things which have occurred since m"foundation ol the Government' But Congress, in its wisdom, may assume the power lo pass laws wiih regard to the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska; but be cause they do ; does ihat determine their power to do so ? Let Congress pause and in quuire into the constitutionality of the act before they assert that they have the right to legislate for the sovereign people of s free Territory. I ean never give my assent to such doctrine; I can never yield to a ques tion of lhat kind, because, if there ia any people on the face of God's earth who bave just cause to be proud of their high and ek" ailed po.- ilioi:, it is the peopfegif this laiitti ami because the power is in theil hands, and not in a superior body. Ami the moment you say, by legislative enactment, that ques tions ot local law can. he .Kansas and Nebraska by Congress, and not by the people, you destroy ihe very fundamental principle of the Government that has been adopted from the Revoletion down to the present time. This is a bill of popular sov ereignty. It is a bill under which the pion eer who may go from my district to seek a western home, has a right to go there, not under the dictation of this government, but as a free man, surrounded by the constitu tional rights of his own State, and clothed with the panopoly of her power; and he who would curtail or abridge any of those rights ol the freemen of the country, does not in my humble opinion—and I say it without any design to give offense—enter tain a just conception with regard to those principles npon which this Government is founded. Speaking of agitation A J feoqjd Jlfiprv.my, desk, the other morning, the prooeedings ,of a meeting held in the district represented by my colleague upon tbe left, (Mr. TROUT) and among the renolulions adopted at that meeting, there wa* one to which I desire to call ihe attention of the committee, to show them in what chaste and modest language men ia this Hall, acting under the sanctity ot a constitutional oath, are denounced as "traiiors" and "scoundrels." I want to show you how we are regarded in some por tions of our own State for standing up for this great principle of pogajar rights and sovereignly. 1 hold in' the pro. ceeding ol a meeting held county of Beaver; and I will read two of the resolu tions as an earnest of what they all are; "Itcsolved, That Stephen A. Douglas aud the other demagogues in Congress, who are favoring the proposed outrage, deserve the execration of all ■■ fix disgra cing their official positions by urging one pottion of tha Union into the guilt of a breach of faith toward another portion, lhat .would disgrace a cnniuniiy of freebooters." So much-for that, tbe resolution is in Mill choice language; " Resolved, That we will bold every Sen ater and member of Congress from a free Stale, who shall give countenance to this threatened outrage upon our rights, as a trai tor gully "f betraying the cause of Itberiy for gold, ortell-pronioliun, or both-" These resolutions