| OCR Text |
Show 208 TilE MISSOURI QUESTION. to it. This is saicl to fix tho chnrnct.cr of jnconsisteney on Virginia. Tllo fact is, Umt VirginitL an<i the Southern States voted for the whole ordinan ·c, when completed; but it is also true that those Lutes had repeatedly voted against the clause excluding slavery. In April, J 784, a vote was taken on this clause, when Maryln.nd, Virginin., and South Carolina voted against it; N o1'Lh Carolina divided, n.nd 0 eorgia absent. Anu although seven States voted for tho clause, it was rejected ; a proof that Cougress then con~ ccivcd that the concurrence of nine States was necessary to every clause of this Orllinance; which they called a 11 com~ pact." In March, 1 7 5, Mr. King proposc<l a similar clause; Yirginin., North Carolina, South Carolinn., nnd Georgia, voted against it; cig·hL States voted for the commitment of it, and it was committed. 'The member from Virginia, (Mr. Grayson,) to whom the measure is ascribed, was uot n. member of Congress in 17 84. My honorable frienu from Massachusetts (Mr. Ilolmcs) was mistaken, when he supposed that Congress of 17 7, was bound by the On1inuncc of 1784, whieh did not ex~ cluue slavery from the Northwestern 'l'erritory. They would have been bound, hud nny part of the land in. Ohio been sold, not to change the Oruinancc of 1784, without the consent of Ohio. l3nt no poiut of the hwd wns sold, previous to tho passage of the Ordinance on tho 13th July, 1787. I hn.vc examined that matter carefully, nnd am unwilling that the committee should be under auy erroneous impressions that I cnn remove. * * * * * * * * It has been said that the Constitution vests jn Congress a. power to make n.ll needfnl regulations respecting the tor~ ntory of the Uuiteu States; anu this power, it is supposed o.uthorizes us to exclude slaves from tile territories of tho 'l'IIE MISSOUJU QUEf:l'riON. 209 United States, o.nd nlso to demanu from n.ny of those territories o.bont to become States, u. sti lHtlnt.ion for the ex-clusion of slaves. The clause of the Constitution referred to, ren.uH thus : 11 'l'he CongreRs shall have power to tliHpose of', and make all needful rules and regulations reApeeting, tho territory or other property belonging to the Uniteu Stn.Lcs." H has been contended that Utis gives n. power of legislation over persons an<l privu.tc property within the terri Lories of the U ni tell S Lo.tcs. 'rbe clause obviously relates to the territory belonging to the Uuited StateH, as property only. 'rho power given is to dispose of, and make n.ll ucedful regulations respecUng, the territorial prop rty, or other property of the United States ; and Congrcr-;s has power to pnss all laws necessary aud proper to tho exercise of that power. This clnuso speaks of tho terri Lory ns property, o.s a sn bjcct of sale. It speaks not of the jurisdiction. 'l'his clause, as first proposed in Convention, read thus: 11 'l.'o dispose of the unappropriated lan<ls of the Unite<l SLates ; to institute temporary governments for new States arising th rein." 'l'ho laLLer power wus not gru.ntcu. (Sec Joumnl Convention, page 260.) Thai the Convention conHidercd us being provitlcd for by tho Ordinance of Congress. rrhis clnusc contaius no grant of power to legiHhtc over pcrt:lons and private property wiLhin a territory. A power to dispose of, nnd mnlc n.ll nccuful regulations respecting the properLy of the United States, is very different from a power to legislate over the persons a.ncl tho property of the people. When it was the intention of the Convention thut the Conslitntion sho uld convey to Congress power to lcgisltLte over perHons n.nd privtLLc property, they expressed themselves in terms not douutful. 14 |
