试析美国早期宪政危机中的密苏里争议

A Tentative Analysis of Missouri Controversy in the Early American Constitutional Crisis

1819—1821年间,围绕密苏里领地是以蓄奴州还是自由州加入联邦这一问题,美国南北议员在联邦国会内展开了激烈的争论,争论的主题是联邦权和州权。由于宪法条文的模糊性,南北各州议员对宪法条款做出了不同的解释,来捍卫自身的利益。北部议员认为联邦国会有权力限制甚至废除密苏里领地的奴隶制;南部议员则认为奴隶制是州内事务,管理奴隶制是各州的权利。密苏里妥协的最终达成并不意味着美国宪政体制的成功,而在于南部议员的团结一致、"奴隶制利益"的影响和一部分北部议员的摇摆。该妥协对美国历史有着深远的影响。

From 1819 to 1821,the U.S.congressmen from both the South and the North had a fierce debate about whether Missouri Territory joined the Union as a slavery state or as a free state,with federation power or state power as the topical subject of the debate.Due to the fuzziness of the U.S.Constitution,the congressmen from the South and the North made different interpretations of the terms in the Constitution to defend their own interests.Members from the North thought the Congress had the power to limit or even abolish slavery in Missouri Territory;while members from the South thought slavery was the internal affair of a state,and it was the right of every state to manage slavery.Missouri Compromise did not imply the success of the U.S.constitutional system,but the solidarity of the southern congressmen,the impact of'slave interests'and the sway of some northern congressmen,which extended a far-reaching influence on the U.S.history.