hich ceded and those which received that extensive domain.
In the other case, Missouri and the whole region affected by the Missouri Compromise were parts of the ter occurred the memorable contest with regard to the admission into the Union of Missouri, the second state carved out of the Louisiana Territory.
The controversy arosxisting slaves would not be affected by their removal from the older states to Missouri; and moreover, that the proposed restriction would be contrary to the spirit, ight be permitted to reside in the proposed new State; and whether Congress or Missouri possessed the power to decide. Notwithstanding all this the restriction was ady lying north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes, north latitude, except Missouri—by implication leaving the portion south of that line open to settlement eithet, under the conviction that it was unauthorized by the Constitution, and that Missouri was entitled to determine the question for herself, as a matter of right, not
bjections made by its adversaries.
Those objections were refuted and silenced, until revived long afterward, and presented as the true interpretation, by the school of which Judge Story was the most effective founder.
At an earlier period—but when he had already served for several years in Congress, and had attained the full maturity of his powers— Webster held the views which were presented in a memorial to Congress of citizens of Boston, December 15, 1819, relative to the admission of Missouri, drawn up and signed by a committee of which he was chairman, and which also included among its members Josiah Quincy.
He speaks of the states as enjoying the exclusive possession of sovereignty over their own territory, calls the United States the American Confederacy, and says, The only parties to the Constitution, contemplated by it originally, were the thirteen confederated States. And again: As between the original States, the representation rests on compact and plighted faith; and y
