Now, sir, let us come to the last session of Congress.  A Nebraska bill passed the House and came to the Senate, and was reported from the Committee on Territories by the Senator from Illinois, as its chairman.  Was there any provision in it which even squinted toward this notion of repeal by supersedure?  Why, sir, Southern gentlemen opposed it on the very ground that it left the Territory under the operation of the Missouri prohibition.  The Senator from Illinois made a speech in defence of it.  Did he invoke Southern support upon the ground that it superseded the Missouri prohibition?  Not at all.  Was it opposed or vindicated by anybody on any such ground?  Every Senator knows the contrary.  The Senator from Missouri (Mr. Atchison), now the President of this body, made a speech upon the bill, in which he distinctly declared that the Missouri prohibition was not repealed, and could not be repealed.

I will send this speech to the Secretary, and ask him to read the paragraphs marked.  The Secretary read as follows: 

“I will now state to the Senate the views which induced me to oppose this proposition in the early part of this session.

“I had two objections to it.  One was that the Indian title in that Territory had not been extinguished, or, at least, a very small portion of it had been.  Another was the Missouri compromise, or, as it is commonly called, the slavery restriction.  It was my opinion at that time—­and I am not now very clear on that subject—­that the law of Congress, when the State of Missouri was admitted into the Union, excluding slavery from the Territory of Louisiana north of 36 deg. 30’, would be enforced in that Territory unless it was specially rescinded, and whether that law was in accordance with the Constitution of the United States or not, it would do its work, and that work would be to preclude slave-holders from going into that Territory.  But when I came to look into that question, I found that there was no prospect, no hope, of a repeal of the Missouri compromise excluding slavery from that Territory.  Now, sir, I am free to admit, that at this moment, at this hour, and for all time to come, I should oppose the organization or the settlement of that Territory unless my constituents, and the constituents of the whole South—­of the slave States of the Union,—­could go into it upon the same footing, with equal rights and equal privileges, carrying that species of property with them as other people of this Union.  Yes, sir, I acknowledge that that would have governed me, but I have no hope that the restriction will ever be repealed.

“I have always been of opinion that the first great error committed in the political history of this country was the ordinance of 1787, rendering the Northwest Territory free territory.  The next great error was the Missouri compromise.  But they are both irremediable.  There is no remedy for them.  We must submit to them.  I am prepared to do it.  It is evident that the Missouri compromise cannot be re-pealed.  So far as that question is concerned, we might as well agree to the admission of this Territory now as next year, or five or ten years hence.”—­Congressional Globe, Second Session, 32d Cong., vol. xxvi., page 1113.