The Crime Against Kansas

issouri, without which that State could not ive been received into the Union. The bar- Lin was simple, and was applicable, of course, fly to the territory named. Leaving all the her territory to await the judgment of bother generation, the South said to the orth, Conquer your prejudices so far as to Imit Missouri as a slave State, and, in consi- sration of this much-coveted boon, slavery tall be prohibited forever in all the remain- g Louisiana Territory above 36° 30': and •/ 7 ie North yielded. In total disregard of history, the President, his annual message, has told us that this >mpromise u was reluctantly acquiesced in by ie Southern States.” Just the contrary is ue. It was the work of slaveholders, and as crowded by their concurring votes upon .reluctant North. At the time it was hailed 7 slaveholders as a vicotry. Charles Pi nek- jy, of South Carolina, in an oft-quoted let- r, written at three o’clock on the night of the At e North it was accepted as a defeat, and the iends of Freedom o very where throughout ;e country bowed their heads with mortifi- ,tion. But little did they know the com- eteness of their disaster. Little did they •earn that the prohibition of Slavery in the erritory, which was stipulated as the price ' iheir fatal capitulation, would also at the very p passage, says, “ It is considered here by iveholding States as a great triumph.” ‘oment of its maturity be wrested from them. Time passed, and it became necessary to pro- ■de for this Territory an organized Govern- .ent, Suddenly, without notice in the public •ess, or the prayer of a single petition, or (ie word of public recommendation from the resident—after an acquiescence of thirty- |ree years, and the irreclaimable possession y the South of its special share under this ’mpromise—in violation of every obligation of mor, compact, and good neighborhood—and • contemptuous disregard of the out-gushing ntiments of an aroused North, this time- snored prohibition, in itself a Landmark of •eedom, was overturned, and the vast region \>w known as Kansas and Nebraska was ^ewed to Slavery. It was natural that a ensure thus repugnant in character should 5 pressed by arguments mutually repugnant. । was urged on two principal reasons, so ophite and inconsistent as to slap each other - the face—one being that, by the repeal of e prohibition, the Territory would be left h)en to the entry of slaveholders with their •ives, without hindrance; and .the other ing. that the people would be left absolutely tc determine the question for themselves, jd rc prohibit the entry of slaveholders with eir slaves, if they should think best. With me, the apology was the alleged rights of "iveliolders; with others, it was the alleged J r / rights of the people. With some, it wag openly the extension of Slavery; and wit! others, it was openly the establishment of Freedom, under the guise of Popular Sovereignty. Of course, the measure, thus upheld in defiance of reason, was carried through Congress in defiance of all the securities of legislation: and I mention these things that you may see in what foulness the - present crime was engendered. It was carried, first, by shipping in to its support, through Executive influence and patronage, men who acted against their own declared judgment and the known will of their constituents. Secondly, by foisting out of place, both in the Senate and House of Representa- ■' tives, important business, long pending, and usurping its room. Thirdly by trampling under foot the rules of the House of Representatives, always before the safeguard of the minority. And Fourthly, by driving it to a close during the very session in which it originated, so that it might not be arrested by the indignant voice of the People. Such are some of the means by which this snap-judgment was obtained. If the clear will of the People had not been disregarded, it could not have passed. If the government had not nefariously interposed its influence, it could not have passed. If it had been left to its natural place in the order of business, it could not have passed. If the rules of the House and the rights of the minority had not been violated, it could not have passed. If it had been allowed to go over to another Congress, when the People might be heard, it would have ended; and then the C' Ine we now deplore, would have been withot its first seminal life. Mr. President, I mean to keep absolutely within the limits of parliamentary propriety. I make no personal imputations; but only with frankness, such as belongs to the occasion and my own character, describe a great historical act, which is now enrolled in the Capitol. Sir, the Nebraska Bill was in every respect a swindle. It was a swindle by the Soutji of the North. It was, on the part of those who had already completely enjoyed their share of the Missouri Compromise, a swindle of those whose share was vet abso- v lutely untouched; and the plea of unconstitu- tionality set up—like the plea of usury after the borrowed money has been enjoyed—did not make it less a swindle. Urged as a Bill of Peace, it was a swindle of the whole country. Urged as opening the doors to slave-masters with their slaves, it was a swindle of the asserted doctrine of Popular Sovereignty. Urged as sanctioning Popular Sovereignty, it was a swindle of the asserted rights of slave-masters. It was a swindle of a broad territory, thus cheated of protection against Slavery. It was a swindle of a great cause, early espoused by

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=