Missouri Statehood Threatens Union

“The Missouri question is the most portentous one that ever threatened our Union.”

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: 1820

At this stage of the controversy Mr. Pinckney, of South Carolina, made a notable speech. He considered that the country “had now arrived at the most awful period which had hitherto occurred on this delicate and distressing subject.” He quoted from a letter of Jefferson, lately published, indicating the portentous character of the Missouri question. * “I agree perfectly with him,” said Mr. Pinckney, “and I consider this, beyond all comparison, the second question in importance which has been agitated among us since our revolt from the parent State. The first was the memorable declaration which confirmed the Union and gave birth to the independence of our country. This is the only one which may, in its consequences, lead to the dissolution of that very Union, and prove the death-blow to all our political happiness and national importance. I express this fear from the fact that gentlemen of the opposition have seen fit to throw off the veil and expressly declare their intention to leave this question to the next Congress; to leave to them unfettered by any act of ours the power to decide how far the true interests of the Union make it necessary to renew the struggle for restriction of slavery in Missouri — a struggle which has during the last three sessions shaken the Union to its very foundations. They openly avow that they do not consider themselves bound by the compact of last year, but aver, if they have the strength to do so, to leave the next Congress free to decide this question as they please.”

[* “The Missouri question is the most portentous one that ever threatened our Union. In the gloomiest moments of the Revolutionary War I never had any apprehension equal to that I feel now from this source.”]

Mr. Pinckney then went into an examination of the Constitution of Missouri, claiming for it an excellence and superiority over the constitutions of other States. “Can it be possible,” he asked, “that so excellent a system can be rejected for the trifling reason that it inadvertently contains a provision prohibiting the settlement of free negroes and mulattoes among them? Or is it not infinitely more probable that other reasons of a much more serious nature, and pregnant with the most disastrous events to the future union and peace of these States, are at the bottom of this unexpected and inexcusable opposition ? The article of the Constitution on which now so much stress is laid — ‘the citizens in each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities in every State,’ — having been made by me, it is supposed that I must know, or perfectly recollect, what I meant by it. In answer, I say that, at the time I drew that article, I perfectly knew that there did not then exist such a thing in the Union as a black or colored citizen, nor could I have conceived it possible such a thing could ever have existed in it.”

[Gen. Charles Pinckney was a member of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.]

Missouri having no idea of the existence of such a thing as a black or colored citizen of the United States, and knowing that all the Southern and Western States had for many years passed laws to the same effect, which laws are well known to Congress, being at this moment in their library, and within the walls of the capitol, and which were never before objected to by them or their courts, they (the people of Missouri) were no doubt warranted in supposing they had the same right. The silence of Congress on the antecedent laws of Southern and Western States might fairly be considered a sanction to Missouri’s proceeding.”

This speech of Mr. Pinckney gave indirect public expression lo the charge, which had been frequently bandied in political circles, that the antislavery restrictionists, having secured the admission of Maine, were now not willing to fulfil the terms of the compromise; that they were guilty of a breach of faith. The in justice of this view is indicated by the fact that some members who had voted against restriction on Missouri in the previous session, were now opposing her admission under her objectionable constitution. Mr. Foot, of Connecticut, was of this number, and he asserted at this stage of the controversy that he would never vote for Missouri’s admission unless the offensive clause were expunged. But, no doubt, the original restrictionists were ready to seize this opportunity to put an obstacle in the way of the admission of another slave State. Mr. Clay, struggling for conciliation, closed the debate. He alternately reasoned, remonstrated, and entreated the House, but his effort was in vain, and his compromise resolution was rejected by a vote of 88 to 82.

It was the day after this seemingly final rejection of Missouri that the two Houses were appointed to meet to count the electoral vote for President and Vice-President. It had been seen, of course, that the question would arise whether the vote of Missouri should be counted, or whether it was entitled to be cast. It had not yet been decided whether Missouri was a State. In order to come to some arrangement by which the Houses could avoid this question when they should come into joint session, Mr. Clay had, ten days before, on February 4th, offered in the House a resolution providing that if any objection be made to the vote of Missouri the President of the Senate, who was to preside on this occasion, should be directed to announce what the result would be if the votes of Missouri were counted and what it would be if the votes of Missouri were not counted;’ “but in either case A. B. is elected President of the United States.”

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