JANUARY, 1820.] Maine and Missouri-Restriction on Missouri. Mr. ROBERTS moved to add to the amendment (whereby Missouri is proposed to be admitted to form a constitution) the following proviso: "Provided, that the further introduction into said State of persons to be held to slavery or involuntary servitude within the same, shall be absolutely and irrevocably prohibited." The said amendment having been readMr. ROBERTS said his objection to the order followed in the introduction of this bill was a serious one. Irregularity in legislative proceedings ought always to be avoided, but more especially on a question laying the foundations of a great community. I have thought, said he, and still think, (with deference to the decision had,) it has been an unfortunate course, and that this will be more apparent as we progress. Many remarks which fell from gentlemen in the discussion hitherto had, now invite reply. I have taken some care to arrange my thoughts for that purpose; but I have determined to withhold them at this time. The subject we are entering upon is one of great magnitude; claiming the coolest exercise of the faculties of the understanding, and the absence from the mind of all sorts of passions. I very much desire to avoid touching any and every subject, however pertinent, calculated to awaken impatience or dissatisfaction, or to use language which may be justly excepted to, as incompatible with this declaration. It has sometimes been permitted, in God's providence, that a people should deliberately fix the great principles of their polity, under circumstances happily calculated to secure to themselves and their posterity the high blessings of his benevolent justice, so as to promise the fulfilment of the great end for which he created man-happiness. Such was the occasion when these States declared themselves free and independent; such was that that secured to the people of the Northwestern Territory the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty; and such, let me observe, and not least in importance, is that on which we are deliberating. The people of these happy States were the first who proclaimed, before the Universe, "That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by the Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to [SENATE. secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." I pray you, sir, go back with me to the memorable era of of our ancestors when they adopted these which I am speaking. How stood the affairs truths as the maxims of their policy? The earth was raised to crush them; that power power of one of the mightiest nations of the censed king, and parliament, and prejudiced was directed by the vindictive spirit of an inpeople. A large mass of the people of America adhered to the mother country, ready to become her willing instruments in the worse scenes of the sanguinary conflict. The States out revenue, without arms, without military were without government, without allies, withorganization. In such a state of things, under such circumstances, they called the Supreme Judge of the world to witness that, as to them, his laws had been violated, and it had become their duty to resist oppression, and on the purity of their motives they invoked the protecting arm of his providence, and plighted their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to vindicate the truth, that governments ought to secure to all men the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What a prodigy! Truths that the speculative philosopher and retired philanthropist had hardly ventured to indulge, were now proclaimed, as the bright gem which was to be obtained cheaply, at the cost of every danger man could encounter. All that before was wonderful, sunk into littleness. The fainting hopes of humanity were revived; the world was irradiated by the blaze of truth; it was as the voice of Justice crying from the wilderness, whither the arm of tyranny had banished her-Despair not, ye oppressed nations! My temples are not everywhere desolate. There is still a people determined and able to vindicate my empire! The pledge they gave was redeemed. The arm of that providence, besought with all the fervency of the prayers of suffering virtue, was extended to good men, engaged in a just cause, who had sworn to establish the great principles of social liberty, or fall willing victims to the high attempt. The oppressor was humbled to acknowledge our country was, and of right ought to be, free and independent. Magnanimous allies had been obtained during the contest, and the recognition of the independence of our country by Britain, removed the last caveat to our admission into the community of nations. History informs us, though independence and peace had been achieved, still much remained to be done, by a wise policy and just laws, to secure the benefit of the great principles consecrated at the birth of our political community. In 1787 an occasion offered more felicitous than that in which the faculties of sovereign power were assumed, to apply the just, social principles unanimously recognized by the great act of the Congress of 1776. The cession of the SENATE.] Maine and Missouri-Restriction on Missouri. (JANUARY, 1820. Northwestern Territory by the several States | designed them to flourish in eternal vigor, and claiming it, in full sovereignty to the United spread their fragrant branches through the States, gave to the old Congress an opportunity world. This mighty stroke of a wise policy of showing that peace and security had not was had under the utmost freedom from all bias weakened their faith in, or lessened their at- of selfishness and of constraint. tachment to, the principles of the great corner stone of all our laws and constitutions-the Declaration of Independence. That instrument had the unanimous vote of the representatives of all the States; there were no geographical distinctions then; slaveholding and non-slaveholding States were not thought of. By one simultaneous act the Congress declared, and the States ratified the declaration, that governments were established to secure the enjoyment of individual rights, deriving their just authority from the consent of the governed. The great men who executed this trust looked not at the bearings of interest or to the gratification of an unworthy ambition. The ordinance declares a second time that slavery was viewed as a great evil, and one for the existence of which the people of that day were not accountable. That States which found themselves under the sad necessity of permitting its continuance, might, at the same time, without inconsistency, declare again and again, all men are created equal. This immortal ordinance, which with its elder sister the Declaration of At that time, let it be remembered, all the Independence, will shed eternal and unextinStates contained slaves, and all the States de- guishable lustre over the annals of our country, clared, before the Supreme Judge of the world, was also adopted by a unanimous vote. It was that slavery was a violation of his truth, and aye, aye, from New Hampshire to Georgia. admitted the binding obligation to remedy the Here again there was no geographical distincwrong, when possible. Now, let us recur to tion. In this act of imperishable virtue Virgi. the ordinance of '87, and the articles of compact nia had the largest share. She ceded the most it contains. I can do it justice in no other lan- extensive and best-founded right to the terriguage than that declaring its purpose as laid tory. She left Congress free to impress on it down by the wise and good men who conceived the fundamental principles of civil and religious and gave it effect. Thus it reads: "And for liberty. She gave her ready voice for the ordiextending the fundamental principles of civil nance, and it is believed her representatives and religious liberty, which form the basis were among the most ardent advocates for the whereon these republics, their laws, and con- measure. I cannot look into the provisions of stitutions are erected; to fix and establish those the articles of compact without burning with principles as the bases of all laws, constitutions, admiration of their principles, and the wisdom and governments, which forever hereafter shall and virtue by which they have been consecrated. be formed in said territory; to provide also for There are no marginal notes, or I would briefly the establishment of States and permanent gov-recount them. The rights of the untutored ernment therein, and for their admission to a Indian were guaranteed, and, in the goodness share in the federal councils, on an equal foot- and wisdom of the legislator, it was left open ing with the original States, at as early periods to his hopes that his posterity might one day as may be consistent with the general interest." enjoy the blessings of the rights they secured. Look at the scope and character of this declara- These blessings, Mr. President, have been altion. Here, indeed, the great self-evident truths ready consecrated to three stars of your constelof which I have been speaking were applied, in lation that will soon take rank as of the first full effect, to a virgin territory, unstained by magnitude. Ohio will probably appear in that the vices, untainted by the errors, and un-em- character at the next census. I have spoken of barrassed by the mistaken notions of interest the ordinance of 1787 as applying to a territory. incident to human society. They were the laws But of what mighty magnitude is it! It is of God, applied to a country before it had been fitted to contain a mightier population than the peopled, by a wise foresight, which has been mightiest of the old continents. If its history often displayed, under the guidance of a kind was not insulated by more comprehensive Providence, by the councils of our country. At events, it might now stand as the world's best the era of Independence the wholesome maxims hope. In this instrument it was not necessary of our policy recognized could not have their to repeat that all men are created equal; that full effect, because in the infancy of our settle- was already inscribed on the corner stone of all ments the curse of slavery had been entailed on your laws and polity. It was here enough to us by a blinded and unkind mother country. say, no man should be a slave, and that every All that virtue could require was, that so invet-man should have an equal share of civil and reerate a disease should be relieved, by applying diligently discreet correctives, and, above all, guarding against the extension of the evil. Thus do we find, four years after peace had been settled, on cool deliberation, the federal council seized the first opportunity of planting the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty, like seed sown in a soil received, as it were, from the hand of the Creator, where they ligious liberty, by the decree of unchangeable justice. So far we discover no holding back: all is one consistent, just, enlightened, and unvarying policy. Every thing seems to have been done in the divine spirit, breathed by the representatives of an oppressed people, in the Declaration of Independence. About this period it became necessary to form a more perfect union, and the constitution, JANUARY, 1820.] Maine and Missouri-Restriction on Missouri. [SENATE meaning has been misunderstood. Turn to the ordinance, and they are made plain. It there reads, the "new State shall be admitted when it shall have sixty thousand free inhabitants therein, by its delegates in the Congress of the United States, on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever, and shall be at liberty to form a permanent constitution and State government; provided the constitution and State government so to be formed shall be republican, and in conformity to the principles contained in these articles." These are conditions under which seven new only the article respecting slavery has been silent in the admission of Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama, and, by especial reservation, it has not been required of Louisiana to forbid slavery. framed by an assembly in which WASHINGTON | in their original relation to other words, their presided, seemed to have put the last hand to the work which placed on an immovable foundation the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty, whereon our republics, their laws and constitutions, are erected. That instrument, framed with almost superhuman intelligence, clothed the Congress with all legislative powers granted in it, and with power to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory belonging to the United States; and all engagements were declared to be as valid against the United States under the constitution as under the Confederation. Among the first acts of the new Congress, is one provid-States have been admitted into this Union, save ing that the ordinance of '87 should continue to have full effect. At the formation of the constitution this ordinance must have been well understood. It was enacted a little time anterior to the adjournment of the Convention, and was the harbinger of the great compact of Union. The councils from which they emanated were clothed with the power, and represented the majesty of the people, and it was impossible that the compromise resorted to by the Convention, in settling the rule of representation and taxation, should not have been considered as applicable only to the States then existing, and to those which might be admitted out of the territory of the good old thirteen. The same obligation of duty, consistency and regard to right, which induced the old Congress to prohibit slavery in the Northwestern Territory, could not have been inoperative in the Convention, as many States had long before abolished slavery; and nobody seems then to have thought it admissible, only under hard necessity. I think it will scarcely be contended, that, in '87, any of our councils could have contemplated the purchase of the territory which presents the great question on which we are now deliberating, or that such a question could have grown out of such an event. In 1787, North Carolina ceded to the United States the territory which is now called the State of Tennessee. In the cession she stipulates, among other things, that the inhabitants of that territory should enjoy the benefits of the ordinance, save only that the Congress should pass no law tending to emancipate slaves. In this, I apprehend, it will hardly be contended she was binding them by restrictions, but that it will be allowed she intended to secure to them all the liberty their condition would permit. This recognition and ratification of the ordinance is proof of the estimation in which its principles were held; and Tennessee has been admitted under its enfranchising, or, as you will call them, restricting provisions, and has long appeared amongst us as an ornament to this body. On her admission are the words, "on an equal footing with the original States," first used. She being the first State admitted under the articles of compact in the ordinance of 87, the words were from thence transplanted, and, like texts from another book, not standing The Can it be possible, after this long-settled construction, it shall be seriously contended that the Congress, in the admission of Missouri, can propose no check on the evil of slavery, and, by parity of reasoning, none on any portion of the country acquired under the title of Louisiana? We have seen Mississippi and Alabama brought into the Confederation, under compact to permit slavery. Louisiana has been so admitted in the discretion of Congress. On what grounds I know not, but I am bound to believe from what was understood to have been uncontrollable necessity. If so, it can avail Missouri nothing, as no such necessity exists in this case. The amendment has, I have to regret, but a limited operation on slavery. It is not proposed to free the slaves in Missouri, but to prevent their increase by emigration. This principle does not touch at all the provisions of the treaty. country is to be eventually incorporated into the Union, it is admitted. We are all anxious the portion in question should. The dispute is, shall she be admitted without securing to her the franchises of civil and religious liberty, as far as her condition admits of its being done. Congress have power to prevent the migration of slaves, and though lexicographers may not be uniform in their interpretation of the word in general acceptation, it means change of place; so it has been construed by the Congress. act now exists prohibiting the migration of slaves to Louisiana, in any manner, but as bona fide the property of persons actually going to settle within it. I know it will be alleged that it is repealed. But I have searched the statute book, and looked into the constitution of Louisiana, and can find no repeal of it. The section I allude to it as follows: An "It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to import, or bring into the said Territory, from any port or place without the limits of the United States, or cause or procure to be so imported, or brought, or knowingly to aid or assist in so importing or bringing any slave or slaves; and every person so offending, and being thereof convicted before any court within' said Territory, having competent jurisdiction, SENATE.] Maine and Missouri-Restriction on Missouri. shall forfeit and pay, for each and every slave so imported, the sum of three hundred dollars; one moiety for the use of the United States, and the other moiety for the use of the person or persons who shall sue for the same, and every slave so brought shall thereupon become entitled to, and receive his or her freedom. It shall not be lawful for any person or persons to import or bring into said Territory, from any port or place within the limits of the United States, or to cause or procure to be so imported or brought, or knowingly to aid or assist in so importing or bringing any slave or slaves which shall have been imported since the first day of May, one thousand seven hundred and ninety eight, into any port or place within the limits of the United States, or which may be hereafter so imported from any port or place from without the United States; and every person so offending, and being thereof convicted before any court within said Territory, having competent jurisdiction, shall forfeit and pay for each and every slave so imported, or brought, the sum of three hundred dollars; one moiety for the use of the United States, and the other moiety for the use of the person or persons who shall sue for the same. And no slave or slaves shall be introduced into said Territory, directly or indirectly, except by a citizen of the United States, removing into said Territory for actual settlement, and being at the time of such removal bona fide owner of such slave or slaves; and every slave brought into the said Territory, contrary to the provisions of this act, shall thereupon be entitled to, and receive his or her freedom." [JANUARY, 1820. cicatrices of barbaric pride—with her features marred as if the finger of Lucifer had been drawn across them. Mr. ELLIOTT, of Georgia, said, with a knowledge of the talents which would be called forth souri, it might seem unnecessary for one so unon this occasion, in behalf of the rights of Misskilled in parliamentary debate, to obtrude his humble efforts on the attention of the Senate. But, said he, the magnitude of the consequences which may grow out of the decision about to be made, and the weight of responsibility resting upon every member charged with the consideration of the subject, urge me to rise, as I honestly conceive, in support of the constitution of my country, the faith of its Government, and the future peace and harmony of the Union. As it is essential to a correct and liberal dis which do not belong to the subject under consideration, you are bound, by the strongest obligations of duty, to exclude them from these walls. Here the passions should be suffered to sleep, while to the unbiased judgment and the enlightened conscience are committed the decisions which may be recorded in your journals. cussion, that the point at issue be clearly understood and dispassionately examined, all irrelevant matter should be cautiously rejected, and the mind brought to the investigation with its powers unembarrassed. How much to be regretted, then, is the public excitement which has been produced in anticipation of this debate! It is, I fear, not well calculated to insure a decision of this question upon its merits. The voice of the people should be heard, and always heard with deep attention and due reIf this be the law, where is your wonder-spect. But, when feelings are thereby excited working writ of habeas corpus? Are your Judiciary asleep, and your law a dead letter? If I be mistaken, I hope to be corrected; but it is enough for my purpose to show such a law has existed, and that the power of Congress to regulate the migration of slaves is not a new doctrine, nor now first proposed to be exercised. It proves incontestably the motion I have now What, then, sir, is the question we are called offered has not hitherto been deemed as conflict- upon to decide? Does it involve the liberty or ing with the provisions of the treaty of cession. slavery of the black population of the United I am willing to consider Missouri as an inchoate States? On this subject the constitution has State; no one will more gladly see her admit- wisely interdicted the interference of the Gented into the Union; but I wish to see the page eral Government. Does it seek a suspension of of her constitution irradiated with the fun- the law prohibiting the unhallowed trade to damental principles of civil and religious liberty Africa, until the people of Missouri shall have -to see her become a party to that covenant accommodated themselves with slaves from that round which the patriots of '76 pledged their unfortunate country? No such sacrifice of feellives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. ing or policy is asked at your hands; on the The committee have attached the admission of contrary, the prayer of the people of Missouri, Missouri to the bill for admitting Maine, under if granted, would not affect the liberty of a the pretext of congeniality. How insufficient single freeman. Neither of these subjects being the pretence! What ludicrous incongruity do before the Senate, the arguments and feelings the two propositions present! You are not which grow out of them are alike foreign to acting on a section of two or three lines; as to the present discussion. But the people of MisMaine, it is her constitution you are ratifying. souri do ask of you to fulfil your solemn enWhat do you find on the front of it? "Arti-gagements in their behalf, and to admit them cle 1, section 1: All men are born free and equal, and are free to worship God in their own way.' "Here is a substantial pledge to the good old faith. To her we may say, Come, sister, take your place in our constellation: the lustre of your countenance will brighten the American galaxy. But do not urge us to admit Missouri, under a pretence of congeniality-with the visage of a savage, deformed with the hideous into the Union, "according to the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States." The question then is, will you thus admit them? Indulge me, sir, with your attention for a few moments, while I briefly consider their claims to such admission: 1st, under the constitution; 2dly, from the obligations voluntarily JANUARY, 1820.] Maine and Missouri-Restriction on Missouri. assumed by the United States, in the treaty of cession, of the 30th April, 1803; and, lastly, from the suggestions of sound policy. In the 3d section of the 4th article of the constitution, it is declared-"New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union ;" and in the subsequent section of the same article, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government." By the first section Congress is obviously clothed with discretionary power to admit, or not to admit, new States into this Union. But, when ever this power is exercised in the admission of a new State into this Union, the United States become bound, by the second section, to aid in the support of a republican form of government within her limits. Hence, the power claimed by Congress to exact a constitution on republican principles, as a condition to the admission of a new State into this Union. The condition is the necessary result of the obligation previously imposed upon the United States to guarantee a republican form of government to each State; and it is to be considered as an evidence of the patronage of the constitution, rather than as any authority to impose restrictions on the States. The second section of the fourth article declares "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States." A new State, then, when once admitted into this Union, becomes possess ed, by the very act of admission, of all privileges and immunities of the old States. But the old States claim and exercise the privilege to alter and amend their constitutions at pleas ure. This is accorded to them as an inalienable, indefeasible right, essential to self-government -and in the use of this right they are unrestrained, provided they preserve the form of the government, and do not violate the Federal Constitution. But the admission of involuntary servitude into a State does not affect the form of the government, nor violate the Federal Constitution; for one-half of the States in the Union allow of it, and the Federal Constitution expressly recognizes and sanctions it. Under the constitution, then, any State in this Union may admit involuntary servitude within its limits, in the exercise of its unquestionable right of self-government; and Congress cannot be supposed to have power to impose a restriction, which the State has authority to abrogate at pleasure. But it is contended by the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. ROBERTS,) that, since the year 1808, Congress has acquired authority, under the ninth section of the first article, to impose the contemplated restriction. This section reads: "The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year 1808, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person." The terms migration and importation | [SENATE. are not synonymous. Migration implies volition, choice, self-direction-but these belong not to a slave. He may be carried or imported, or he may abscond, but he can never migrate. The Irish, the Scotch, and the Dutch, migrate to this country, and it was probably to prevent Congress, until after the year 1808, from interdicting this practice, under the authority given to that body "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization," that the word migration was introduced in this section. But importation applies to slaves. They were imported; and the last clause of this section is conclusive as to the correctness of this exposition-" but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.' The subjects of this tax or duty were persons imported, while those who migrated were suffered to enter our ports without the imposition of any duty. This section is restrictive, and restrains the power of Congress to prohibit the importation of slaves or the migration of foreigners prior to the year 1808. Since that period, Congress has very wisely acted upon the subject of the slave trade, and, under the authority imparted by the constitution, "to regulate commerce with foreign nations," such laws have been passed as promise at no distant period its entire suppression. But Congress has never attempted to prevent the transfer or removal of slaves from one State to another at the will of their owners. The section restrains no such power, for no such is given in the constitution. The truth is, it is a right claimed and exercised by the States, and they will never surrender it. Congress has no authority for claiming it. But the latter part of the third section of the fourth article, it is supposed, gives to Congress competent authority on this subject. It reads -"The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." Under the authority here given, Congress may lay out and dispose of the lands of the United States; and when inhabited, make such rules and regulations as may be needful for the civil government of the territory. But the question before the Senate is not what rules and regulations Congress may make for the government of a territory. It is, I conceive, sir, entirely a distinct subject of inquiry, and, therefore, cannot depend for its decision upon any authority drawn from this clause. Whenever the question respecting the powers of Congress to impose restrictions on the Territories shall come up, it will be time enough to argue it; at present it ought not to be permitted to embarrass the point at issue before the Senate. To me, then, the constitution does not seem to countenance the inhibition sought to be imposed by the amendment. But, sir, the treaty of cession of the 30th of April, 1803, is still more explicit on this subject. The third article provides that, "the inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States, |