the individual States.

On the 2nd of March, 1803, Mr. Randolph made | tion of slaves, born within the United States, from any of what appears to have been a unanimous report from this Committee, of which we give so much as relates to Slavery-as follows:

This report and resolve were committed and made a special order on the Monday following, but were never taken into consideration.

The rapid population of the State of Ohio sufficiently evinces, in the opinion of your Committee, that the labor At the next session, a fresh letter from Gov. of slaves is not necessary to promote the growth and William Henry Harrison, inclosing resolves of settlement of colonies in that region; that this labor the Legislative Council and House of Represendemonstrably the dearest of any-can only be employed in the cultivation of products more valuable than any tatives in favor of suspending, for a limited peknown to that quarter of the United States; that the riod, the sixth article of compact aforesaid, was Committee deem it highly dangerous and inexpedient to received (Jan. 21st, 1807) and referred to a SeImpair a provision wisely calculated to promote the hap: lect Committee, whereof Mr. B. Parke, delegate piness and prosperit of the northwestern country, and to give strength and security to that extensive frontier. from said Territory, was made Chairman. In the salutary operation of this sagacious and benevo- entire Committee (Mr. Nathaniel Macon, of N. lent restraint, it is believed that the inhabitants of Indi-C., being now Speaker,) consisted of

ana will, at no very distant day, find ample remuneration for a temporary privation of labor, and of emigra

tion.

The Committee proceed to discuss other subjects set forth in the prayer of the memorial, and conclude with eight resolves, whereof the only one relating to Slavery is as follows:

Resolved, That it is inexpedient to suspend, for a limited time, the operation of the sixth article of the

compact between the original States and the people and

States west of the river Ohio.

This Report having been made at the close of the Session, was referred at the next to a new Committee, whereof Cæsar Rodney, a new Representative from Delaware, was Chairman. Mr. Rodney, from this Committee, reported (February 17th, 1804),

That, taking into their consideration the facts stated in the said memorial and petition, they are induced to believe that a qualified suspension, for a limited time, of the sixth article of compact between the original' States and the people and States west of the river Ohio, might be productive of benefit and advan

tage to said Territory.

MESSRS. ALSTON, of N. C.
MASTERS, of N. Y.
MORROW, of Ohio.

PARKE, of Ind.

The

RHEA, of Tenn.
SANDFORD, of Ky.
TRIGG, of Va.

Mr. Parke, from this Committee, made (Feb. 12th,) a third Report to the House in favor of granting the prayer of the memorialists.

This report, with its predecessors, was committed, and made a special order, but never

taken into consideration.

The same letter of Gen. Harrison, and resolves the Senate, Jan. 21st, 1807. They were laid on of the Indiana Legislature, were submitted to the table "for consideration," and do not appear to have even been referred at that session; but at the next, or first session of the fourth Congress, which convened Oct. 26th, 1807, the President (Nov. 7th) submitted a letter from Gen. Harrison and his Legislature-whether a new or old one does not appear-and it was now referred to a Select Committee, consisting of Messrs. J. Franklin, of N. C., Kitchel, of N. J., and Tiffin, of Ohio.

Nov. 13th, Mr. Franklin, from said committee, reported as follows:

The Report goes on to discuss the other topics embraced in the Indiana memorial, and concludes with eight resolves, of which the first (and only one relative to Slavery) is as follows: The Legislative Council and House of Representatives, in their resolutions, express their sense of the proResolved, That the sixth article of the Ordinance of priety of introducing Slavery into their Territory, and 1787, which prohibited Slavery within the said Territory, solicit the Congress of the United States to suspend, for be suspended in a qualified manner, for ten years, so as a given number of years, the sixth article of compact, to permit the introduction of slaves, born within the in the ordinance for the government of the Territory United States, from any of the individual States; pro-northwest of the Ohio, passed on the 13th day of July, vided, that such individual State does not permit the 1787. That article declares: "There shall be neither importation of slaves from foreign countries: and pro- Slavery nor involuntary servitude within the said Tervided, further, that the descendants of all such slaves ritory." shall, if males, be free at the age of twenty-five years, and, if females, at the age of twenty-one years.

The citizens of Clark County, in their remonstrance, express their sense of the impropriety of the measure, and solicit the Congress of the United States not to act on the subject, so as to permit the introduction of slaves into the Territory; at least, until their population shall entitle them to form a Constitution and State Govern

ment.

The House took no action on this Report. The original memorial from Indiana, with several additional memorials of like purport, was again, in 1805-6, referred by the House to a select committee, whereof Mr. Garnett of Vir-spectfully submit the following resolution: ginia was chairman, who, on the 14th of February, 1806, made a report in favor of the prayer e Territory of the United States northwest of the river of the petitioners-as follows:

That, having attentively considered the facts stated in the said petitions and memorials, they are of opinion that a qualified suspension, for a limited time, of the sixth article of the compact between the original States, and the people and States west of the river Ohio, would be beneficial to the people of the Indiana Territory. The suspension of this article is an object almost universally desired in that Territory.

After discussing other subjects embodied in the Indiana memorial, the Committee close with a series of Resolves, which they commend to the adoption of the House. The first and only one germane to our subject is as follows:

Resolved, That the sixth article of the Ordinance of 1787, which prohibits Slavery within the Indiana Territory, be suspended for ten years, so as to permit the introduc

Your Committee, after duly considering the matter, reResolved, That it is not expedient at this time to suspend the sixth article of compact for the government of

Ohio.

And here ended, so far as we have been able to discover, the effort, so long and earnestly persisted in, to procure a suspension of the restriction in the Ordinance of 1787, so as to admit Slavery, for a limited term, into the Territory lying between the Ohio and Mississippi rivers, now forming the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

THE FIRST MISSOURI STRUGGLE.

The vast and indefinite Territory known as Louisiana, was ceded by France to the United States in the year 1803, for the sum of $15,00,000, of which $3,750,000 was devoted to the

Yeas-For the Restriction:

New-Hampshire...

4 New-York...

15 New-Jersey.

payment of American claims on France. This to this amendment, which was sustained by the territory had just before been ceded by Spain to following vote: [taken first on agreeing to so France without pecuniary consideration. Slave- much of it as precedes and includes the word holding had long been allowed therein, alike!"convicted."] under Spanish and French rule, and the Treaty of Cession contained the following stipulation: Art. III. The inhabitants of the ceded Territory shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages and immunities of citizens of the United States; and in the meantime they shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion which they profess.

Massachusetts.
Rhode Island.
Connecticut..
Vermont...

Delaware.

1 Pennsylvania..
7 Ohio.

5 Indiana..

1

23

5

20

5

1

Total Yeas 87-only one (Delaware) from a Slave State.

Nays

Massachusetts.

Ohio.
Illinois..

Maryland..

...

13

Total Nays, 76-10 from Free States, 66 from

The State of Louisiana, embodying the south- New-York... ern portion of this acquired territory, was re-New-Jersey cognized by Congress in 1811, and fully admit- New-Hampshire.. ted in 1812, with a State Constitution. Those who chose to dwell among the inhabitants of Delaware.. the residue of the Louisiana purchase, henceforth called Missouri Territory, continued to hold slaves in its sparse and small but increas-Slave States. ing settlements, mainly in its southeastern quarter, and a pro-Slavery Court-perhaps any Court -would undoubtedly have pronounced Slavery legal anywhere on its vast expanse, from the Mississippi to the crests of the Rocky Mountains, if not beyond them, and from the Red River of

Louisiana to the Lake of the Woods.

The XVth Congress assembled at Washington, on Monday, Dec. 1st, 1817. Henry Clay was chosen Speaker of the House. Mr. John Scott appeared on the 8th, as delegate from Missouri Territory, and was admitted to a seat as such. On the 16th of March following, he presented petitions of sundry inhabitants of Missouri, in addition to similar petitions already presented by him, praying for the admission of Missouri into the Union as a State, which were, on motion, referred to a Select Committee, consisting of

Messrs. Scott, of Mo.; Poindexter, of Miss.; Robertson, of Ky.; Hendricks, of Ind.; Livermore, of N. H.; Mills, of Mass.; Baldwin, of Pa.

April 3d, Mr. Scott, from this Committee, reported a bill to authorize the people of Missouri Territory to form a Constitution and State Government, and for the admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the original States; which bill was read the first and second time, and sent to the Committee of the Whole, where it slept for the remainder of the session.

The House now proceeded to vote on the residue of the reported amendment (from the word "convicted" above), which was likewise sustained.-Yeas, 82; Nays, 78.

So the whole amendment-as moved by Gen. Tallmadge in Committee of the Whole, and there carried--was sustained when reported to the House.

Mr. Storrs, of New York (opposed to the Restriction), now moved the striking out of so much of the bill as provides that the new State shall be admitted into the Union "on an equal footing with the original States "which, he contended, was nullified by the votes just taken. The House negatived the motion.

Messrs. Desha, of Ky., Cobb, of Ga., and Rhea, of Tenn., declared against the bill as amended.

Messrs. Scott, of Mo., and Anderson, of Ky., preferred the bill as amended, to none.

The House ordered the bill, as amended, to a third reading; Yeas, 98; Nays, 56. The bill thus passed the House next day, and was sent to the Senate.

The following sketch of the debate on this question (Feb. 15th) is condensed from that in the Appendix to Niles's Register, vol. xvi.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FEB. 15, 1819. Mr. Tallmadge, of New York, having moved the following amendment on the Saturday preceding

convicted; and that all children born within the said State, after the admission thereof into the Union, shall be declared free at the age of 25 years,”

That Congress convened at Washington for its second session, on the 16th of November, 1818. Feb. 13th, the House went into Committee of involuntary servitude, be prohibited, except for the "And provided that the introduction of Slavery, or the Whole-Gen. Smith, of Md., in the Chair-punishment of crimes, whereof the party has been duly and took up the Missouri bill aforesaid, which was considered through that sitting, as also that of the 15th, when several amendments were adopted, the most important of which was the following, moved in Committee by Gen. James Tallmadge, of Duchess county, New-York, (lately deceased):

And provided also, That the further introduction of Slavery or involuntary servitude be prohibited, except for the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall be duly convicted and that all children of slaves, born within the said State, after the admission thereof into the Union, shall be free, but may be held to service until the age of twenty-five years.

On coming out of Committee, the Yeas and Nays were called on the question of agreeing

Mr. Fuller, of Massachusetts, argued that, to effect a concert of interests, it was proper to make concessions. The States where Slavery existed not only claimed the right to continue it, but it was manifest that a general emancipa

tion of slaves could not be asked of them. Their political existence would have been in jeopardy; both masters and slaves must have been involved in the most fatal conse quences.

To guard against such intolerable evils, it is provided in the Constitution, "that the migration or importation of such persons, as any of the existing States think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited till 1808.-Art. 1, sec. 9. And it is provided elsewhere, that persons held to service by the laws of any State, shall be given up by other States, to which they may have escaped, etc.-Art. 4, sec. 2. These provisions effectually recognized the right in the

Congress will not contribute to discountenance and ren der abortive the generous and philanthropic views of this most wo. thy and laudable society.

Mr Tallmadge, of New York, followed

States, which, at the time of framing the Constitution, held | the blacks in Slavery, to continue so to hold them until they should think proper to meliorate their condition. The Constitution is a compact among all the States then existing, by which certain principles of government are established for the whole, and for each individual State. Sir, said he, it has been my desire and my intention to The predominant principle in both respects is, that avoid any debate on the present painful and unpleasant ALL MEN ARE FREE, and have an EQUAL RIGHT TO LIBERTY, subject. When I had the honor to submit to this House and all other privileges; or, in other words, the pre- the amendment now under consideration, I accompanied dominant principle is REPUBLICANISM, in its largest sense. it with a declaration that it was intended to confine its But, then, the same compact contains certain excep- operation to the newly acquired Territory across the tions. The States then holding slaves are permitted, Mississippi; and I then expiessly declared that I would from the necessity of the case, and for the sake of union, in no manner intermeddle with the slave-holding States, to exclude the republican principle so far, and only nor attempt manumission in any one of the original States so far, as to retain their slaves in servitude, and also their in the Union. Sir, I even went further, and stated that progeny, as had been the usage, until they should think it I was aware of the delicacy of the subject--and, that I proper or safe to conform to the pure principle, by abolish-had learned from Southern gentlemen the difficulties ing Slavery. The compact contains on its face the and the dangers of having free blacks interming.ing general principle and the exceptions. But the attempt with slaves; and, on that account, and with a view to to extend Slavery to the new States, is in direct violation the safety of the white population of the adjoining of the clause which guarantees a republican form of gov-states, I would not even advocate the prohibition of ernment to all the States. This clause, indeed, must be construed in connection with the exceptions before mentioned; but it cannot, without violence, be applied to any other States than those in which Slavery was allowed at the formation of the Constitution.

The Speaker (Clay) cites the first clause in the 2d section of the 4th article-" The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the several States," which he thinks would be violated by the condition proposed in the Constitution of Missouri To keep slaves-to make one portion of the population the property of another-hardly deserves to be called a privilege, since what is gained by the masters must be lost by the slaves. But, independently of this consideration, I think the observations already offered to the committee, showing that holding the black population in servitude is an exception to the general principles of the Constitution, and cannot be allowed to extend beyond the fair import of the terms by which that exception is provided, are a sufficient answer to the objection. The gentleman proceeds in the same train of reasoning, and asks, if Congress can require one condition, how many more can be required, and where these conditions will end? With regard to a republican constitution, Congress are obliged to require that condition, and that is enough for the present question; but I contend, further, that Congress has a right, at their discretion, to require any other reasonable condition. Several others were required of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Mississippi. The State of Louisiana, which was a part of the territory ceded to us at the same time with Missouri, was required to provide in her Constitution for trials by jury, the writ of habeas corpus, the principles of civil and religious liberty, with several others, peculiar to that State. These, certainly, are none of them more indispensable ingredients in a republican form of government than the equality of privileges of all the population; yet these have not been denied to be reasonable, and warranted by the National Constitution in the admission of new States.

slave y in the Alabama Territory; because, surrounded as it was by slave-holding States, and with only imaginary lines of division, the intercourse between slaves and free blacks could not be prevented, and a servile war might be the result. While we deprecate and mourn over the evil of slavery, humanity and good morals require us to wish its abolition, under circumstances consistent with the safety of the white population. Willingly, therefore, will I submit to an evil which we cannot safely remedy. I admitted all that had been said of the danger of having free blacks visible to slaves, and, therefore, did not hesitate to pledge myself that I would neither advise nor attempt coercive manumiss.on. But, sir, all these reasons cease when we cross the banks of the Mississippi, into a Territory separated by a natural boundary-a newly acquired Territory, never contemplated in the formation of our government, not included within the Compromise or mutual pledge in the adoption of our Constitution-a new Ter.itory acquired by our common fund, and which ought justly to be subject to our common legislation.

Sir, when I submitted the amendment now under consideration, accompanied with these explanations, aud with these avowals of my intentions and of my motives I did expect that gentlemen who might differ from me in opimon would appreciate the liberality of my views, and would meet me with moderation, as upon a fair subject for general legislation. I did expect, at least, that the frank declaration of my views would protect me from harsh expressions, and from the unfriendly imputat.ous which have been cast out on this occasion. But, sir, such has been the character and the violence of this debate, and expressions of so much intemperance, and of an aspect so threatening have been used, that continued silence on my part would ill become me, who had submitted to this House the original proposition.

Sir, has it already come to this: that in the Congress of the United States-that, in the Legislative councils of Republican America, the subject of Slavery has become One gentleman, however, has contended against the a subject of so much feeling-of such delicacy-of such amendment, because it abridges the rights of the slave- danger, that it cannot safely be discussed? Are memholding States to transport their slaves to the new States, bers who venture to express their sentiments on this for sale or otherwise. This argument is attempted to be subject, to be accused of talking to the galleries, with enforced in various ways, and particularly by the clause intention to excite a servile war; and of meriting the in the Constitution last cited. It admits, however, fate of Arbuthnot and Ambrister? Are we to be told of of a very clear answer, by recurring to the 9th sec- the dissolution of the Union, of civil war and of seas of tion of article 1st, which provides that "the migration or blood? And yet, with such awiul threatenings before us, importation of such persons as any of the States then ex- do gentlemen, in the same breath, insist upon the encouristing shall admit, shall not be prohibited by Congress till agement of this evil; upon the extension of this monstrous 1808." This clearly implies that the migration and im-scourge of the human race? An evil so fraught with portation may be prohibited after that year. The impor- such dire calamities to us as individuals, and to our tation has been prohibited, but the migration has not nation, and threatening, in its progress, to overwhelm the hitherto been restrained; Congress, however, may restrain civil and religious institutions of the country, with the it, when it may be judged expedient. liberties of the nation, ought at once to be met, and to be controlled. If its power, its influence, and its impending dangers, have already arrived at such a point, that it is not safe to discuss it on this floor, and it cannot now pass under consideration as a proper subject for general legislation, what will be the result when it is spread through your widely-extended domain? Its present threatening aspect, and the violence of its supporters, so far from inducing ine to yield to its progress, prompt me to resist its march. Now is the time. It must now be met, and the extension of the evil must now be prevented, or the occasion is irrecoverably lost, and the evil can never be controlled.

The expediency of this measure is very apparent. The opening of an extensive slave market will tempt the cupidity of those who, otherwise, perhaps, might gradually emancipate their slaves. We have heard much, Mr. Chairman, of the Colonization Society; an institution which is the favorite of the humane gentlemen in the slave-holding States. They have long been lament ing the miseries of Slavery, and earnestly seeking for a remedy compatible with their own safety, and the happiness of their slaves. At last, the great desideratum is found a colony in Af.ica for the emancipated blacks. How will the generous intentions of these humane persons be frustrated, if the price of slaves is to be doubled by a new and boundless market! Instead of emancipation of the slaves, it is much to be feared that unprincipled wretches will be found kidnapping those who are already free, and transporting and selling the hapless victims into hopeless bondage. Sir really hope that!

Sir, extend your view across the Mississippi, over your newly-acquired Territory-a Territory so far surpassing, in extent, the limits of your present country, that country which gave birth to your nation-which achieved your Revolution-consolidated your Union-formed your Constitution, and has subsequently acquired so much

glory, hangs but as an appendage to the extended empire | presented, were immediately concerned. But when a over which your Republican Government is now called to question such as the amendments proposed by the gentlebear sway. Look down the long vista of futurity; see men from New York (Messrs. Tallmadge and Taylor), was your empire, in extent unequaled, in advantageous presented for consideration, involving constitutional prinsituation without a parallel, and occupying all the valua-ciples to a vast amount, pregnant with the future fate of ble part of one continent. Behold this extended en pire, the Territory, portending destruction to the liberties of inhabited by the hardy sons of American freemen, that people, directly bearing on their rights of property, knowing their rights, and inheriting the will to protect their state rights, their all, he should consider it as a derethem-owners of the soil on which they live, and inter- liction of his duty, as retreating from his post, nay, double ested in the institutions which they labor to defend; with criminality, did he not raise his voice against their adoptwo oceans laving your shores, and tributary to your tion. purposes, bearing on their bosoms the commerce of our people; compared to yours, the governments of Europe dwindle into insignificance, and the whole world is without a parallel. But, sir, reverse this scene; people this fair domain with the slaves of your planters; extend Slavery, this bane of man, this abomination of heaven, over your extended empire, and you prepare its dissolution; you turn its accumulated strength into positive weakness; you cherish a canker in your breast; you put poison in your bosom; you place a vulture preying on your heart-nay, you whet the dagger and place it in the hands of a portion of your population, stimulated to use it, by every tie, human and divine. The envious contrast between your happiness and their misery, between your liberty and their slavery, must constantly prompt them to accomplish your destruction. Your enemies will learn the source and the cause of your weakness. As often as external dangers shall threaten, or internal com-gress into the Union." The only power given to the Conmotions await you, you will then realize that, by your own procurement, you have placed amidst your families, and in the bosom of your country, a population producing at once the greatest cause of individual danger, and of national weakness. With this defect, your government must crumble to pieces, and your people become the scoff of the world.

Sir, we have been told, with apparent confidence, that we have no right to annex conditions to a State, on its admission into the Union; and it has been urged that the proposed amendment, prohibiting the further introduction of Slavery, is unconstitutional. This position, asserted with so much confidence, remains unsupported by any argument, or by any authority derived from the Constitution itself. The Constitution strongly indicates an opposite conclusion, and seems to contemplate a difference between the old and the new States. The practice of the government has sanctioned this difference in many respects.

Sir, we have been told that this is a new principle for which we contend, never before adopted, or thought of. So far from this being correct, it is due to the memory of our ancestors to say, it is an old principle, adopted by them, as the policy of our country. Whenever the United States have had the right and the power, they have heretofore prevented the extension of Slavery. The States of Kentucky and Tennessee were taken off from other States, and were admitted into the Union without condition, because their lands were never owned by the United States. The Territory northwest of the Ohio is all the land which ever belonged to them. Shortly after the cession of those lands to the Union, Congress passed, in 1787, a compact, which was declared to be unalterable, the sixth article of which provides that, "there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said Territory, otherwise thun in the punishment for crimes, whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted." In pursuance of this compact, all the States formed from that Territory have been admitted into the Union upon various conditions, and, amongst which, the sixth article of this compact is included as one.

Mr. Scott entertained the opinion, that, under the Constitution, Congress had not the power to impose this, or any other restriction, or to require of the people of Missouri their assent to this condition, as a pre-requisite to their admission into the Union. He contended this from the language of the Constitution itself, from the practice in the admission of new States under that instrument, and from the express terms of the treaty of cession. The short view he intended to take of those points would, he trusted, be satisfactory to all those who were not so anxious to usurp power as to sacrifice to its attainment the principles of our government, or who were not desirous of prostrating the rights and independence of a State to chimerical views of policy or expediency. The authority to admit new States into the Union was granted in the third section of the fourth article of the Constitution, which declared that "new States may be admitted by the Congress by this section appeared to him to be, that of passing a law for the admission of the new State, leaving it in possession of all the rights, privileges, and immunities, enjoyed by the other States; the most valuable and prominent of which was that of forming and modifying their own State Constitution, and over which Congress had no superintending control, other than that expressly given in the fourth section of the same article, which read, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government." This end accomplished, the guardianship of the United States over the Constitutions of the several States was fulfilled; and all restrictions, limitations and conditions beyond this, was so much power unwarrantably assumed. In illustration of this position, he would read an extract from one of the essays written by the late President Madison, contemporaneously with the Constitution of the United States, and from a very, celebrated work: "In a confederacy founded on republican principles, and composed of republican members, the superintending government ought clearly to possess authority to defend the system against aristocratic or monarchical innovations. The more intimate the nature of such an union may be, the greater interest have the members in the political institutions of each other, and the greater right to insist that the forms of government under which the compact was entered into, should be substantially maintained. But this authority extends no further than to a guarantee of a republican firm of government, which supposes a preexisting government of the form which is to be guaranteed. As long, therefore, as the existing republican forms are continued by the States, they are guaranteed by the Federal Constitution. Whenever the States may choose to substitute other republican forms, they have a right to do so, and to claim the Federal guarantee for the latter. The only restriction imposed on them is, that they shall not exchange republican for anti-republican Constitutions; a restriction which, it is presumed, will hardly be considered as a grievance."

Mr. Scott believed it to be a just rule of interpretation, that the enumeration of powers delegated to Congress weakened their authority in all cases not enumerated; Let gentlemen also advert to the law for the admission and that beyond those powers enumerated they had none, of the State of Louisiana into the Union; they will find it except they were essentially necessary to carry into effect filled with conditions. It was required not only to form a those that were given. The second section of the fourth Constitution upon the principles of a republican govern- article of the Constitution, which declared that "the citiment, but it was required to contain the "fundamental zens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges principles of civil and religious liberty." It was even re- and immunities of citizens in the several States," was quired, as a condition of its admission, to keep its records, satisfactory, to his judgment, that it was intended the citi and its judicial and its legislative proceedings, in the Eng-zens of each State, forming a part of one harmonious lish language; and also to secure the trial by jury, and to surrender all claim to unappropriated lands in the Territory, with the prohibition to tax any of the United States' lands.

After this long practice and constant usage to annex conditions to the admission of a State into the Union, will gentlemen yet tell us it is unconstitutional, and talk of our principles being novel and extraordinary?

Mr. Scott. of Missouri, said:

He trusted that his conduct, during the whole of the time in which he had had the honor of a seat in the House, had convinced gentlemen of his disposition not to obtrude his sentiments on any other subjects than those on which the interest of his constituents, and of the Territory he re

whole, should have, in all things, equal privileges; the necessary consequence of which was, that every man, in his own State, should have the same rights, privileges, and powers, that any other citizen of the United States had in his own State; otherwise, discontent and murmurings would prevail against the general government who had deprived him of this equality.

For example, if the citizens of Pennsylvania, or Virginia, enjoyed the right, in their own State, to decide the question whether they would have Slavery or not, the citizens of Missouri, to give them the same privileges, must have the same right to decide whether they would or would not tolerate Slavery in their State; if it were otherwise, then the citizens of Pennsylvania and Virginia would have more rights, privileges and powers in their