The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-08-08

Mexico out Of the bill, exposed it to the agrees
sions of Texas, at the same time securing TO the
latter the benefit Of an implied title
This was change fifth and did Mr.. Clay en-
terrain the moral view Of Slavery prevalent in
the North, we should define it as prof'gate
change.
From this general view Of the conduct OF Mr.
Clay, from the time he introduced his resolutions,
we are compelled infer that the subject Oh ois-
very is not with him a matter Of conscience
that in all questions connected with 1t he acts
from considerations of mere expediency, not from
any high moral principle-tbat the leading idea
with him, in his attempt to settle the ooDtrover-
sizes growing out Of it. was, not to establish right
principles not to do justice, not to secure the in
terests of Freedom, but simply to suppress agita-
ton, and restore peace, by Compromise framed
without the slightest regard to the conscientious
convictions Of either of the antagonist parties
and to be consummated by any and every sort Of
appeal to their best or worst feelings, just as
the exigency might demand.
We do not question MIR. Clay's patriotism. He
loves his whole country he is controlled by no
narrow prejudices; he is devoted to the Union,
and seeks its perpetuatiOn. His intellectual
power is great, his tact is extraordinary, his elo
quence remarkably impressive; and he is en-
Jy D. SIR 5es:e~ - H,be cs,,sDitv for oon-
ironing and leading Ol,ier mv4, v,ou r... .u,v.-
lect not inferior to his own But the principle Of
Compromise has vitiated his character as a states
man, aud given direction to his political course,
by no means conducive to the highest interests Of
his country. In every conflict between important
principles we find him appearing, not with view
to determine which is the true principle, and
then to enforce it in action, but as q Compro-
miser, insisting upon the sacrifice Of both the
opposing principles, without regard to their truth
or falsehood, and upon the adoption Of some expe-
dent for securing temporary peace between their
respective advocates. The result has always been,
not settlement of any important question, but
an evasion, postponement-a mere hollow truce
between hostile parties while their antagonisms
have gone on increasing, and the difficulties in
the way of permanent settlement have continu-
ally accumulated II seems TO US that it was the
high duty of American statesmen to meet boldly
every great question as it arose, to measure it in
all its length and breadth, to ascertain the true
principle on which lie oughs IS. be settled, and
then to enforce that principle to its full extent
The conflict between opposing parties, instead of
being eyaded postponed, or allayed by temporary
expedients, ought to have been decided one way
or the other-in favor of one principle or an
other. Compromise, by balancing between oppo-
sing claims, by keeping up sort of equilibrium
between warning principles and interests, neces-
sarily fostered agitation, irritation, mutual jeaou
sizes, insidious attempts at overreaching thus in
tensifying the causes of hostility, which from time
to time would necessarily provoke open and dan
gerous collision. Had Mr.. Clay, as statesman,
belonged to the school Of Principle, instead of
Expediency, had he proceeded on the theory that
political questions should be disposed of accord
ing to fixed principles, not temporary devices,
had he recognised in all his course as legislator,
the paramount claims Of abstract Truth and
Right, and conformed his conduct rigidly to them,
he would have been the model statesman of the
age, and his memory would have been consecrated
by the goodness as well as greatness of his acts.