The primitive Republican. (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-1852, 1851-08-14

audience aale LEO 81 ~ lsaE0r ot tll 81
Union party Is egieNl il % able and
impassioned inanneI, &c Gestures Of just
|ment, and while he admitted their imper
feetions 90 Ear as intriinsicIerit was concerns
ed, he.exposed the folly ofall schemes Of re-
sistance, not only because be measures were
in accordance with the Cotbtitutionl but also
from the fact that every Southern State, but
South Carolina, had exprSssed their Qcqui-
essence in those measures, He was follow
edby Col. Young, who in ID unusually calm
and restrained manner, lablred to prove that
the adjustment excluded tie South from all
participation in our late acquisitions, that
unless restrained BY the united and active
opposition Of the South, The Anti-slayery
feeling, would continue to progress, until the
institution itself would be pyerthrown, and
lastly that Gov. Quitmaa and his friends,
simply contemplated some such mild mode
of opposition, as remonstr3nce and the like,
and occupied the position Of petitioners rath-
Ier than disunionists
He was succeeded by Mf. Cobb, who pro-
ceeded to argue the issues made by Quitman's
message, being as he said a deliberate propo-
sition to secede from the Union, in case Cal
ifornia was not dismenlbered by the line of
36 30. He also held every supporter of
Quitman as responsible for these doctrines,
since whatever their partial opinions or plat
forms were, their "aid and comfort neeessa-
rily tended towards the triumph Of Quitman-
ism. He reviewed the Compromise meas
ures, and in the case of California de6ed his
opponents to explain any principi9 upon
which they could shift the responsibility Of
alledged hardships from the people Of Cali
fornia to Congress, which simply did what
all acknowledged her right to do in her adj
mission.
The discussion was concluded by W. L.
Harris, Esq, whose speech was principally
devoted to the ineficiency of the territorial
bills, so far as protection to slavery was con-
cerned. He argued that in the first place a
doubt as to the validity of Mexican laws was
sufficient to discourage southern immigration;
in the second place the tenure of slave prop
erty was insecure without some penal enact
ment for furnishing those who steal and har-
Dor slaves, since in the first place merely
civil process is too expensive to be resorted
to, in thesecond place that Judgment for dam
ages in case of success before the courts,
would in nine out of ten eases be a nullity,
owing to the insolvency of the thief. From
all Of which considerations Mr. IT argued
that the failure Of Congress to repeal the
Mexican laws, or provide for the punishment
or trespass upon slave property, converted
the territories to the purposes of frce-soil.
He advocated the policy of taxing northern
goods, unless they consented to repair these
omissions in Congress.
Such isarunning outline of the discussion
| in which We have endeavored to do justice te
all parties. While all acquitted themselves
creditably it was obvious to all, that Messrs
Cobb and Barksdale must have had every adj
vantage in point of fact and argument, tc
sustain themselves so we'll against such able
eloquent and experienced dcclaimers
/