The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-11-26

Aseshsr Mares Ksss
The editors Of the Souih~s Prsu and the Charleston
Mercury arc the most wonderful discovaas OF mares
asss Of modern times They seem TO be blessed with
Scotch second sight" they have beea INDUCING
.csrvoyant" snooze. under the hand OF mesmsric
oscromancer The Press il thrown into a state of
hvstercs al It's pemsa Of our hypothetical censure Of
Mr. Clay for pocaimng that he would adhere 10 the
Union, though the federal government, should abolish
l.vsry in the States against their consenlf in fact
he ever uttered such a sentiment and we do not be.
lave he ever took such ground. The Press rolls up
the whites Of It's eyes and turns the palms Of its
hands as this something very extraordinary All
4 is extraordinary. indeed grandmothsrs wore night
,sos and the opinion has prevailed for generations
among juusnes, that :. when the sky falls we shall
,,ch larksm What say the political Columbuses of the
Pres, 10 these profound discoveries OF early times
Probably patent could hardly be obtained for either OF
these inventions
The following is the equally marvellous discovery Of
the Mercury:
From the Charleston Mercury. E
CHAsss or PaRAssolocy - Swift describes good style
=, consisting psope Woods 10 proper places Hence
orh let adopt the proper name a. the proper time
IT,, i, disc ard the soers. and use only abol-
There " now no soil for The iree-soilers TO stand
mon That question Is settled by the Compromises Arch
meIes himself could find an inch to Xix his lever
Taee left but aboons- aud lot Them have ali
~ orait and all the nfany Of The l. those men
Who would disturb the institutions Of the country without
gn's. authority In The constitution or u Tie theory
cetnent The aies together or "a The social ties which
should bna people oycther-le those madmen Hot
spurshese dsurbss of the public peace-oe branded
sbollonists' s@#
The above 10 from the Washington Union Of Saturday
previous Of that paper
nary acknowledgment Among its vlporing4 here
tofoe always stood prominent the assertion TINT thu
.Comrromise" did not seo the question Of slavery in New
Maxiuo and Ufah-tat the North and South left -
chances theie, with neither favor obstruction
legislation Of Congress. Now tie Union tells
with GOODNESS, that the "Compronse" settled the
whole that there Is foot Of soil Tor anti slavery
tho possession Of I. plain acknowledgment
that they ALREADY haze me tptots, plain dtkaoedg-
nent thai the real difference betWesn the "Comproise aad
the Wilsof Propiso" Oas Wsbssr, Clay, ard Cass
uai~ssi~ed to Be. d6renc, Of words oay,hat they
both aimed ut and attained the same thing.
We can scarcely condescend to refuts such obvious
palpable sophistrysach ridcu-
lous nonsense.
The editor OF the Union is here converted into good
WiImot Proviso by the Mercury with as much ease
as polonius shapes in the cloud We must beg leave
to decline this high honor Of meamorposs We under.
stand the Compromise very differently from the Mercury
The Wmo Proviso would have expressly excluded sauery
by OF Congress from the Territories if lad passed
The Compromise does such thing 1t expressly leaves
all parties free to emgrate TO them with all their prop
sy and to be protected in its enjoyment by the provs.
ions Of the constitution Of the United States until suf
Gent popalaon be settled there form State govern
men When this occurs. the whole regulation Of
this subject belongs the people who forms their State
constitution. This is Mr.. Calhouns doctrine and that
Of every candid and enlightened man in the South The
Compromise did settle this whole question, because ii
rejected the Wmot Prouiso, and left the citizens of
the South and the North to possess their property
and exercise their rights. under the shield Of the fed
srd Constitution, upon terms Of entire equality We
hope the fundamental prRcipe is too plain for illus
taton. that If slave be property in South Carolina,
remains property wherever the owner takes it, unless
some express local law dives the right The horn book
Of the law Of nations teaches this great principle Then,
the Wmot Provso not being attached the Territories
Of Utah or New Mexico. such local emancipation can
Be pretended As TO the effect Of the Mexican law, we
proved in paper few days ago that could not APP
ply and il il did, it would not have the operation sup
posed Of berating the slave. The State Of Texas is
clear in point where slaves taken, owned and
born under the very identical law Of Mexico set up
this instances and lawyer has questioned or doubted
the validity Of the title without an express confirmation
But the pretence is ridiculous. that obsolete law Of
Mexico could change control the rights OF American
citizens under their federal constitution We do no,
believe that General Cas- ever coalended for the doc
tnss imputed to him. The was put as hypothetical
by Mr.. Clay and Mr.. Webster. So far as we are our
selves concerned, we have not only made no such ais
sion but have constantly advocated the very opposite
doctrine We again repeat that free soil is dead and
buried and that the rights Of the South in the Territories
defined and established on her opn prineipies