ous, at least, if not illegal as well as inequitable, to interfere. It was evident, also, that of all mortals on the face of the earth, the colored population of Washington was the most easy-going, and, so far as such a population can be, the most comfortable in its condition. All complaints and petitions for their benefit came from persons at a distance, who, as the eyes of members of Congress daily testified to them, were profoundly ignorant of every fact essential to the rightful expression of either judgment or feeling upon the subject.

Long before this matter came to a point, however, the severe and protracted struggle upon the question of admitting Missouri into the Union had taken place. That State was formed out of part of the territory of the Louisiana purchase. Louisiana was made a State in the year 1812, without objection on the score of slavery. Earnest opposition to its reception was indeed offered, in which Mr. Quincy, of Massachusetts, took a conspicuous part; but this was based upon a denial of constitutional authority to create new States out of territory not originally within the limits of the United States. In the whole of the ancient territory of Louisiana, slavery had been fixed from the time of its settlement. That part of it out of which it was proposed to create the new State of Missouri occupied the same relations to the United States, which the entire domain did as soon as Louisiana was admitted. There was now the advantage, however, that no question of constitutional authority remained. That point had been already passed upon, wrongfully as many thought, yet so determined inevitably, in obedience to the requirements of the case.

It is interesting, at this time, to notice those limitations, by which many of the Northern members of Congress, in 1811, conceived that the General Government was hedged in. Several propositions, conformable to the views of Mr. Quincy, just referred to, received considerable support in the Senate. One of them demanded that the consent of each of the State Legislatures be obtained, before the act admitting Louisiana should be held valid. Another asked that a con

THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE.

39

stitutional amendment, as a preliminary condition, should be first procured, to empower Congress to admit new States formed of territory outside of the original boundaries of the Union. Both the Senators of Massachusetts voted for these motions, as did the other New England members, with the exception of one from Rhode Island, and another from Vermont. And this condition of mind is the more worthy of remark, because the party which held such State right views of the relations between the Union and the several States, under various phases, at that earlier period, made no objec tion to any stretch of power by the officers of the General Government, at a later date, if exerted against their political opponents, though affecting directly the property and lives of fellow-citizens.

The controversy which arose upon the application of the inhabitants of the Missouri territory, to be received into the Union, began in December, 1818, and continued with various fortunes, until the final determination of the question in February, 1821. In February, 1819, the bill reported by the committee, for the admission of Missouri "on an equal footing with the original States," having come up for consideration, an amendment was submitted by a member of the House from New York, providing against the further introduction of slavery, and for the freedom of all children of slaves born in the State after its admission; but allowing the latter to be held to service until the age of twenty-five years. This amendment was acted upon by separate clauses, and the first clause was adopted by a vote of 87 against 76, and the second by a vote of 82 against 78. All of the majority were Northern representatives, but ten members from Northern States voted with the minority. In the Senate, the amendment was stricken out, and no agreement having been reached by the two branches during that session, the bill was lost.

In the mean time, a memorial from the people of Maine, asking to be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, had been presented in the House,

and a bill in conformity with the prayer of the petition was passed (January, 1820) and sent to the Senate. The committee of that body, to which it was referred, reported in favor of the bill, coupling with it amendments, which provided for the admission of Missouri also, but containing no clause in regard to slavery. To this position the Senate adhered, but the House refused to agree.

At length, after much counter-voting, from session to session, and correspondent debate, a committee of conference was appointed in the Senate, February 28, 1820, and on the next day a similar committee on the part of the House. By the recommendation of this joint committee, the bill for the admission of Maine was discharged from those amendments added to it by the Senate, which provided for the admission of Missouri; so that now the bill stood upon its own footing, and was separately acted upon. The committee at the same time recommended a bill to authorize the people of Missouri to form a constitution and State government, striking out the clause which prohibited slavery within the State to be thus formed, but excluding slavery from "all that territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of 36° 30' north latitude, not included within the limits of the State of Missouri." The vote was first taken in the House, on striking out the clause which prohibited slavery in Missouri, and was decided in the af firmative by-yeas, 90; nays, 87. On this question, fourteen members from the Northern States voted with the majority. The main question was taken upon concurrence with the Senate, in the provision which inhibited slavery in the rest of the territory, north of 36° 30' north latitude, and the vote showed-yeas, 134; nays, 42.

It may be useful briefly to analyze and compare the votes of the two Houses on this important subject. Upon finally adopting the clause which prohibited slavery in territories. north of latitude 36° 30', the count in the Senate had been 34 in the affirmative, to 10 in the negative. From the slave States there were 14 votes in the majority upon this question,

VOTES IN CONGRESS NOT YET SECTIONAL.

41

and 8 in the minority. The question then was upon the adoption of the bill before the Senate. This bill provided for the admission of Maine, and contained certain amendments providing also for the admission of Missouri. It excluded slavery from all of the Louisiana territory north of 36° 30', except that part included within the limits of Missouri. The bill was agreed to by the vote of-yeas, 24; nays, 20. Of the members from slave States who thus voted, there were 20 in the affirmative, to 2 in the negative. In the House, upon the chief question, which was the probibition of slavery in the Louisiana territory lying north of 36° 30′ north latitude, the vote of members from the slave States stood-yeas, 39; nays, 37. Of the nine votes of South Carolina, it may not be irrelevant to remark, five were given in the affirmative. The bill, as finally passed, was approved March 6, 1820.

Intense excitement was stirred up in the country, during the long protracted and warm discussion of this question in Congress. In the mean time, the matter had been debated in the Legislatures of the Northern States, many of which had passed resolutions and sent them to Congress, in opposition to the admission of Missouri as a slave State. It is plain, however, that, whatever deductions may be justly drawn from the votes of the majority of Northern members of Congress, who represented, doubtless, the supposed tendency of opinion among their constituents, the question of promoting what has more lately been called "the slave power" had not assumed any sectional aspect in the South. A majority of Southern Senators and Representatives had voted, on the recent occasion, to extend the terms of the Ordinance of 1787 to the territory west of the Mississippi. To be sure, they insisted upon receiving Missouri into the Union with slavery; but it was already slave territory, and to refuse the request of its inhabitants would be to deprive them of their prop erty and accustomed rights. As to that part of the territory, to which the prohibition was in fact applied, it was as yet only the haunt of the savage and the habitation of doleful

creatures. But it comprehended Kansas and Nebraska; and the line of 36° 30′ north latitude, ran along the southern boundary of the former immense tract, which became the occasion, and the scene of a struggle so fierce and prolific of results, after the lapse of another generation.

The dispute in regard to Missouri, however, was not ended by the passage of the act empowering the territory to form a constitution and State government. A new cause of disagreement sprang up, when the frame of government adopted by the territorial convention was presented for the approval of Congress, preparatory to the transformation of the territory into a State. That constitution contained a clause, requiring the future legislature to forbid, by law, the immigration of free persons of color into Missouri. In view of this "restriction," as it was called, the contest of preceding years was renewed, and raged with increased animation. It would be tedious to recapitulate the several steps by which the final result was reached. Of the temper of the two Houses, some judgment may be formed from the fact, that Mr. Clay, then a member of the lower branch, and subsequently chairman of the House Committee of Conference, felt it necessary, as matters approached a crisis, "earnestly to invoke a spirit of harmony and concession." In the same spirit, Mr. Barbour, of Virginia, also of the committee, on the part of the Senate, when the question was on the eve of a vote in that body, urged "the expediency of harmony and concession on this momentous subject."

On the 26th of February, 1821, Mr. Clay, from the joint committee, reported a joint resolution, which was adopted by both Houses, and by virtue of which the admission of Missouri into the Union was consummated. The resolution provided that the restrictive clause, which had been the occasion of so much heat, should never be so construed as to authorize the passage of any law, nor should any law be passed, by which a citizen of any other State should be excluded from the enjoyment of any of the privileges and immunities to which he would be entitled under the Constitu