House Passes Missouri Compromise

On March 1st the House passed its Missouri bill with restriction.

Continuing The Missouri Compromise,
our selection from The Great Events by Famous Historians, Volume 16 by James Albert Woodburm published in 1905. The selection is presented in ten easy 5 minute installments. For works benefiting from the latest research see the “More information” section at the bottom of these pages.

Previously in The Missouri Compromise.

Time: March 1, 1820

Holmes then pertinently remarked that in this Clay had taken the position that “unless others do what they think is wrong you will not do what you acknowledge to be right.” And Livermore, of New Hampshire, pointedly inquired of Clay why he had not “called a pause” on the usual admission of States before the admission of Alabama in that very year. The situation clearly shows us that the real issue, that which divided men into party contestants and was decisive of their votes and conduct, was the question of slavery and its interests. The doctrine of the sovereignty and equality of States was put forward to defend the interests of slavery.

When the Maine bill was reported to the Senate by the committee, with the Missouri “rider,” January 13, 1820, Senator Roberts, of Pennsylvania, endeavored to secure a recommitment of the bill with a view to their separation. Failing in this, he moved, on January 17th, an absolute antislavery restriction. After this was voted down the restrictionists in the Senate came again to the conflict by a motion from Senator Burrill, of Rhode Island, to apply to Missouri “the first three articles of compact in the Ordinance of 1787.” The great debate then continued in the Senate for a month, and on February 16, 1820, the Senate agreed to the amendment of its committee combining the Maine and Missouri bills in one. Then Mr. Thomas, of Illinois, amid the highest excitement of the debate, offered the following important amendment to the Missouri section of the bill:

And be it further enacted, That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States under the name of Louisiana, which lies north of 360 and 30′ north latitude, excepting only such part thereof as is included within the limits of the State contemplated by this act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in punishment of crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall be and is hereby forever prohibited.”

This amendment contains the substance of the final settlement. Barbour, of Virginia, attempted to have the line fixed at 400 and 30′; only three Senators voted for his proposition. Eaton, of Tennessee, offered as a substitute for the Thomas amendment a section prescribing the same limits as the Thomas amendment, but providing that the restriction apply only while said portion of country remains a Territory. Eaton found it use less to press the substitute, which was merely an abstract declaration against the right of Congress to impose conditions upon a State, and he withdrew it. Trimble, of Ohio, proposed to make the restriction apply to all territory west of the Mississippi except Missouri. After these three suggestions had been made in vain the Thomas amendment was adopted the next day in the Senate by a vote of 34 to 10, without change and without debate, and on the 18th the Maine and Missouri bills in one, with the compromise amendment, were formally passed.

On February 19, 1820, the House took up these Senate amendments to the Maine bill. Taylor moved that the House disagree, whereupon Scott moved that the amendments be sent to the committee of the whole, which was then, and had been for days, considering the House Missouri bill. This motion took precedence and a spirited debate followed, but commitment was defeated by a vote of 107 to 70. The question then came up on the motion to disagree, which was debated for three days, when, on February 23d, the House disagreed to the Missouri attachment by a vote of 93 to 73> and then to the restrictive amendment by 159 to 18. So the Senate Maine-Missouri bill with the Thomas amendment was defeated in the House. The House then went into the committee of the whole on its own bill with the Taylor restriction, which was still pending. The House continued the debate on this restrictive clause February 24th and 25th.

On the 26th Mr. Storrs of New York moved the substance of the Thomas amendment and supported it in a speech “embracing incidentally an examination of the right of imposing the slavery restriction on Missouri.” On February 28th the Senate sent a message to the House saying that it insisted on its amendments. Taylor moved that the House insist upon its disagreement. By a vote of 97 to 76 the House again refused to agree to the rolling of Maine and Missouri into one bill. Then disagreement to the restrictive compromise amendment was voted by 160 to 14, Lowndes, of South Carolina, explaining for the friends of Missouri that though he favored such a proposition, yet, since the free admission of Missouri had been defeated, the restrictive amendment was useless, and there was no motive to vote for it with the Maine bill alone. The chief desire of the men for whom Lowndes spoke was to secure the immediate admission of Missouri without restriction; to that end they were ready to consent to restriction on the Territories. The House had again disagreed to both amendments of the Senate.

Mr. Thomas, of Illinois, moved that a committee of conference be appointed, which was the occasion of a debate of “vehemence and warm feeling.” The Senate voted to request a conference, and Senators Thomas of Illinois, Pinkney of Mary land, and Barbour of Virginia were appointed the Senate conferees. On the following day, February 29th, the House agreed to confer, and Messrs. Holmes of Massachusetts, Taylor of New York, Lowndes of South Carolina, Parker of Massachusetts, and Kinsey of New Jersey were appointed to manage the conference on the part of the House.

On March 1st the House passed its Missouri bill with restriction. It was immediately taken up in the Senate and on March 2nd it was passed, after striking out restriction and substituting the Thomas compromise amendment. This agreed with what, it seemed to be understood, would be the report of the conference committee. This report, made in the House by Mr. Holmes on March 2nd, contained three distinct recommendations: (1) The Senate should give up a combination of Missouri in the same bill with Maine, and Maine should be admitted; (2) the House should abandon the attempt to restrict slavery in Missouri ; (3) both houses should agree to pass the Senate’s Missouri bill with the Thomas restriction excluding slavery north and west of that State.

More information here and here, and below.

We want to take this site to the next level but we need money to do that. Please contribute directly by signing up at https://www.patreon.com/history