11 section of the joint resolution for annexing Texas ? Here it is : “ New States, of convenient size, not exceeding four in numberjin addition to said State of Texas, having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution. And such States as may be formed out of that portion of said territory lying south of 36 deg. 30 min. north latitude, comm' nly known as the Missouri Compromise line, shall be admitted into, the Union with or without Slavery, as the people of each State asking admission may desire And in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory north of said Missouri Compromise line, slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.” This article saved the Compromise of 1820, in express terms, overcoming any implication of its abrogation, which might, by accident or otherwise, have crept into the Compromise of! 1850; and any inferences to that effect, that might be drawn from any such circumstance as that of drawing the boundary line of Utah so as to trespass on the Territory of Nebraska, dwelt upon by the Senator from Illinois. The proposition to abrogate the Missouri Compromise, being thus stripped of the pretence that it is only a reiteration or a reaffirmation of a similar abrogation in the Compromise of 1850, or a necessary consequence of that measure, stands before us now upon its own merits, whatever they may be. But here the Senator from Illinois challenges the assailants of these bills, on the ground that they were all opponents of the Compromise of 1850, and even of that of 1820. Sir, it is not my purpose to answer in person to this challenge. The necessity, reasonableness, justice, and wisdom of those Compromises, are not in question here now. My own opinions on them were, at a proper time, fully made known. I abide the judgment of my country and man- . kind upon them. For the present, I meet the Committee who have brought this measure forward, on the field they themselves have chosen, and the controversy is reduced to two questions : 1st. Whether, by letter or spirit, the Compromise of 1820 abrogated or involved a future abrogation of the Compromise of 1820'? 2d. "Whether this abrogation can now be made consistently with honor justice, and good faith? As to my right, or that of any other Senator, to enter these lists, the credentials filed in the Secretary’s office settle that question. Mine bear a seal, as broad and as firmly fixed there as any other, by a people as wise, as free, and as great, as any one of all the thirty-one Republics represented here. But I will take leave to say, that an argument merely ad personam, seldom amounts to anything, more than an argument ad capt'an- duin. A life of approval of compromises, and of devotion to them, only enhances the obligation faithfully to fulfil them. A life of disapprobation of the policy of compromises only renders one more earnest in exacting fulfilment of them, when good and cherished interests secured by them. Thus much for the report and the bills of the Committee, and for the positions of the parties in this debate. A measure so bold, so unlooked for, so startling, and yet so pregnant as this, should have some plea of necessity. Is there any such necessity ? On the contrary, it is not necessary now, even if it be altogether wise, to establish Territorial Governments in Nebraska. Not less than eighteen tribes ot Indians occupy that vast tract, fourteen of which, I am informed, have been removed there by our own act, and invested with a fee simple to enjoys secure and perpetual home, safe from the intrusion and the annoyance, and even from the presence of the white man, and under the paternal care of the Government, and with the ■instruction of. its teachers and mechanics, to acquire the arts of civilization and the habits of social life. I will not say that this was done to prevent that Territory, because denied to slavery, from being occupied by free white men, and cultivated with free white labor; but I will say, that this removal of the Indians there, under such guarantees, has had that effect. The Territory cannot be occupied now, any more than heretofore, by savages and white men, with or without slaves, together. Our experience and our Indian policy alike remove all dispute from this point. Either these preserved ranges must still temain to the Indians hereafter, or the Indians, whatever temporary resistance against removal they may make, must retire. Where shall they go? Will you bring them back again across the Mississippi ? There is no room for Indians here. Will you send them northward, beyond your Territory of Nebraska, towards the British border? That is already occupied by Indians; there is no room there. Will you turn them loose upon Texas and New Mexico ? There is no room there. Will you drive them over the Rocky mountains? They will meet a tide of immigration there flowing into California from Europe and from Asia. Whither, then, shall they, the dispossessed, unpitied heirs of this vast continent, go ? The answer is, nowhere. If they remain in Nebraska, of what use are your Charters ? Of what harm is the Missouri Compromise in Nebraska, in that case? Whom doth it oppress ? No one. Who, indeed, demands territorial organization in Nebraska at all? The Indians? No. It is to them the consummation of a long-apprehended doom. Practically, no one demands it. I am told that the whole white population, scattered here and there throughout these broad regions, exceeding in extent the whole of the inhabited part of the United States at the time of the Revolution, is less than fifteen hundred, and that these are chiefly trappers, missionaries, and a few mechanics and agents
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=