The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1849-07-06
{ ,nspsss Of Col. B-nssn's EpeeeL ct Dscnsvilie,
sa:ssday. yuMe 9th.

hftwo o'clock tie court was crowded
and as many a, the windows as could fnt
r,,m. Col. B-uion made his thanks TO The
citizens Of Cooper, and Of Boopville, for the
kind invitation they had given him, and fol
the fun attendance with which they had
honored him, and for hearing before they
condemned; and went on 10 ray, that il
there were any present who had joined il
proceeding elsewhere 10 condemn him be
fore he was heard, he dia not wish the m to
consider him as speaking to them with any
view 10 change their opinions, as il was mol
his ha'i, to speak TO judges who condemn
first and hear the defence afterwards.
Proceeding TO his subject, he said it was
no; his intention 10 repea, here speed
which had been made Jefferson City, and
which had bccn published That speech
was to stand-nothiug added 10 il nothing
subiracted from it, nothing qualified in it
lie was particular in saying this, tina. il an,
person from apprehension, or indistnct
hearing should suppose him to vary that
speech in any particular, il would be a mis-
take; and he warned them in time against
il. lie meant TO speak on different part
IF the subject: and one which had not hcen
dwell upon at jefferson; he meant to SPEAK
oi his appeal to the people, aud vindCaie
his right, aud their right in making it. j
was, perhaps, the first time that an appeal
had been taken in such a ease: and it " as
certainly the first time that such an ecca-
sien for appealing had ever occurred. 1t
was new case; and required a new rem
edy; and the want of precedent made no
difference. Right would never have COM
menced, in any case, if il had to wait for
precedent; aud, besides, precedent was n
lawyers argument. and had nothing 10 do
with the people in their original and snver-
eisn capacity. The appeal was more in IA
vor Of their rights than his. They were
the supreme judge, and had ri.lttto retain
Jurisdiction of the case. Their rights and
interests were at stake, and it was their
prerogative TO allude to these rights and du-
ties. The members Of the General Assem-
lly, and the Senators and Representatives
in Congress were al! the agents Of the peo-
pie, and the people had authority over them
all, and especially when there was any
weston between these agents as 10 the
manner OF doing the peoples business. His
appeal was to the people eL the question Of
their own will it was 10 the whole people;
for the instructions to him were in the name
Of the whole. They were not party in
were IN the name Of the State and to the
State only, could the question Of their cor
rect0ess be directed. lie then took nine
different points of oIjecien TO the instruct
ions, and spoke TO each point fully az he
presented speaking two hours, aad car
Tying conviction and satisfaction with him
ashc went. We can only state these points,
md give brief notes Of the arguments which
sustained them.
Thatthey were in conflict with insruc-
tons given by the previous general Assem-.
bly,, and complied with by him. On the
10Th Of February, lSi7, the General Assem-.
bly, Of Missouri had passed resolutions in.
structing their Senators TO apply the Miss
onri compromise 10 the new territories
which might he acquired, with preamble
recting the object Of the compromise act
n declared in its title, 10 admit the State Of
Missouri on an equal footing with the other
States sand tc prohibit sldrrry in certain
territories" and declaring that the peace,
rermanency and welfare OF the National
Union depended upon strict adherence 10
the letter aud spirit Of that act. The subse.
qnent Instructions OF the 18th Of March, 1919
denied the power Of Congress TO prohibit
slavery in the territoi les; and made the dis
solution Of the Union dependent on the pas
sage of any act of Congress which prohi5.
tied slavery in any part OF any territory
Thus the two sets Of instructions were di.
tecHy opposite to each other, both in point
Of constitutional power, and IN point of con-
sequence. They stand opposite at both
points, for and against the Constitution !;
and for and against the Union. These first
instructions, Mr.. b. said, were constitutional,
just and proper, were in accordance with
the will Of the people, had been complied
with by him, and had never boeu resCinded
by any previous resolve Of the General 4 s.
sembly, nor reversed hy any descision uf
the people. More than that; they had pas
sed the General Assembly unanimously /,
for the journals showed no division and as
certain m embers who voted for the second
set Of resolution were members Of the pre-.
vions General Assembly. they must have
voted dramatically opposite, both on the
point Of constitutions! law and on the point
Of saving mr. destroying the Union; and lie
did not know that any member in that cat
cgory had conhescended IN explain the pro-
cess by which, he came 10 the conclusion Of
voting the second time directly contrary to
his first vote. In such a sudden. total, vio-
lent, radical change on such points as those
ct constitutional law, and the salvation or
destruction Of the Union, those who voted
both ways ought TO account for the change,
ought 10 show the process by which their
minds were turned upside down. aud faced
10 the right about. They ought to do i, for
their own jns,iicaiion--fcr their own credit
as well as for the bene ct of others. Per.
haps they might make converts if they
woald show how they themselves were con
vsried. But, no! not word The fatal
contradiction was not ercn meniioncd-no,
even "tGrEcy" said 10 il. And thus. the
last instructions were in double conflict it'll
the first, both as the act Of the body, and as
the act Of individual members.
:. The second objection Mr.. u. took. was
that these second resolutions did moi ema
nate from any known WILL or desire Of the
people. And here, he laid down a position
10 wit; th.t the members in voting for Sen.
ators in Congress, aud in giving them in.
structions, were acting in their Representa-.
fluS capacity, and were bound to conform "a
the will of the people and this, he said re
suited not only from the nature of our Gov.
eminent, but was consecra,ed in the Mis-.
souri, Constitution, which made a distinc.
lion between the manner Of voting in the
original, or in the Representative charac,e,
citizen vntino~ il, HE soya,a;., .a..a:,..