The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-07-12
The Tennessee Tri,nmers.

Messrs. A. p. Nicholson, and the editor of the
Nashville Union supported the resolutions of the
Nashville Convention. Mr. Nicholson voted for
them. ao...a,. -... ...
And the Nashville Union said: "Upon this
platform we take our stand and the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it."
The news arrived here and caused some alarm
among the more immediate political associates
of these gentlemen. And as soon as time enough
elapsed for word to be sent back, forthwith these
leading politicians "wheel about and turn about"
The Nashville Convention rejected the pending
Compromise plan in the Senate, and adopted
another But these gentlemen have now written
column upon column in defence of the Senate
plan, and in derogation of the Convention plan.
They are evidently, however, written with the
fear of the people of Tennessee before their eyes,
as well as of certain politicians here at Washing
ton. They wish to assume position that will
enable them to come in hereafter, on the Nash
vile platform, or that of the Committee of the
don't intend to waste time or ink on their labo-
rious abortions. But as specimen of the men,
tai abasement to which they are reduced, we
take the following from the Union defining its
"position."-sL
The Clay Compromise Bill provides governments
for ms territory, without any prohibition against
| slavery, and thereby secures to the South all the
rights as to carrying slaves there which Congress
| could constItutionally secure. Ii is surely no
substantial objection against the bill that Mr. Clay
or any other Senator supports 1t under the belief
that the Mexican law against slavery is in force in
the territories acquired from Mexico. Unless it
| can be shown that Congress has the power to
legsae on the subject of slavery in the territories
"a power which the South has sternly denied to
Congress,) we are compelled to risk the question
| as to the existence OF the Mexican law and to
| submit it to the decision of the Supreme Court
What difference then can it make, il some of the
supporters Of the bill think the Mexican law is in
| force, whilst others think it is not? The South
claims an equal right with the North to 90 into
| these territories, and they demand that Congress
shall not pass any law interfering with or abridg-
ing this right Mr. Claws bill expressly disclaims
any interference with the rights of the Southern
men to carry slaves into the territories but leaves
these rights to be adjudicated by the Supreme
Court, the only tribunal which can settle them -
The idea that it is no objection to Compro-
mise that the parties to it differ totally as to the
meaning and effect of it, could have occurred to
no man, we presume, not reduced to tho last
tricks of party. But for Southern man in
southern land to enter into an argument to prove
that the South ought to agree to q settlement
which gives up all the territory in dispute in Cal
ifornia exclusively to the North, and which gives
the balance to New Mexicans, reserving to the
South only the right of litigating in the Supreme
Court for the privilege of going into it, is the
most signal of all the "evils of the day.
1t refreshing to observe that this detection has
been met and chastised by gentleman in Tenn
nessee, Mr.. Aaron V. Brown, whose position in
that State, and whose knowledge of its people,
gives strong assurance that the good cause will
be upheld there. We make the following en-
tract from his letter to the Nashville Union:
The Missouri Compromise as the standard or
measure Of concession to which the South might
| submit without dishonor, no new doctrine
with me. have the beneficial results of that
compromise in the admission Of Arkansas and
| Florida, two slaveholding States without anv So
rious opposition by the North. had seen the
same line extended through the territory of Texas
when annexed to the United States with the hap
pest influences on the country Under the Itch,
of such experience, in my messages to the Gen.
eral Assembly and in all my popular addresses 70
the people Of Tennessee in three arduous can.
vases-at all times and on all occasions. have
n advocated the line of Sod 30m north latitude as
Just and reasonable line OF partition But am
free to declare that have never seen the dav o,
the hour when would have conceded more thar
this, or have fallen below that measure of con
cession. The despotsm of numbers may mus
ter all her forces-fanaticism may kindle all he,
fires, the fairest fields Of the South NAV be desc
lated, before will consent to add dishonor ant
degradation to the other wrongs of the South
But do not mean to deal in any triaing play O
words, when l advocate and assent to the Mis-
!, sour Compromise. | do not demand it in he
rerbd. look rather to the true nature and sub
stance Of things, and whenever the South shall b,
rendered an adjustment which shall be equivalen
to that compromise, for shall not hesitate tc
advise Its acceptance. Having stated that wa,
IN favor OF the present bill, with amendments,
VIII proceed frankly to state what amendments In
t my opinion, would make it equivalent to the Mis-
sour compromise, and therefore acceptable.
r In the hrst place, would remove eperu shado,r
81 doubt from that part of the bill which relates "a
txlng the future boundaries of Texas. bv eynreas
y declaring that the territory proposed 10 he coded
to the United States should be slave Territory in
her hands precisely as it now is in the hands Of
q Texas. To such an explanation none could oh.
Ject, except only such as were resolved not 10
abide by the express terms and conditions Of an.