The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-05-06

but unlike Lowndes," am willing to trust
her once mare An act passed under such eif.
cumstances may be repealed by u reckless ma.
jority," but such a violation OF confidence and
such breach of faith, would justify at once, q
dissolution of the Union
Again, "Lowndcs" says, that with the old
dsturbers of the countrys peace, ! maintain
that Congress has the power to determine lha'
some States shall be free and others slape,' ~
other words that Congress has the power to
pass the Missouri compromise bill My reply
is simply this: Ii it was deemed advisable in
1920, BY such men as Samuel Smith, OF Mary
land; Lewis McLane, of Delaware; Floyd, aud
Nelson, of Virginia; Williams, of North Caro-
lima; Crawford, of Georgia. VIM. K King, OF
Alabama Johnson, of Kentucky Williams, Of
Tennessee, and Others, to waive their constitu-
tional rights and compromise the questloD---nay
it not be prudent for their successors TO do the
same thing? II, when Texas was annexed to
the Union, the North and the South agreed to
adopt aud apply the Missouri compromise to
that territory, may it not with equal proprlety,
be applied now to California, New Mexico, and
Utah! If able, honest, and patriotic men could
sustain this measure from 1920 to the time OF
the meeting of the Nashville convention, with
out abandoning the rights, or sacrificing the in
terests of the South, may it not be done now,
when the same necessity exists for the exercise
of spirit of peace, liberality, and fIaterna re-
gard These are plain questions, and should
like to see them satisfactorily answered Con
gress, with the consent of the North and the
South, can do in 1850, what was done in 1920
If it had power to pass the Missouri compromise
then, with the same understanding and agree
ment, it has power to pass it now.
What doctrine is violated and what interest is
sacrificed now, that was not violated and sacri.
feed then? The situation of the country is
very much the same. 1t is agitated, distracted
and convulsed now, as it was then The stab
ility of the government is shaken, and the Union
itself trembes under the earthquake shock o.
popular excitement If concessions were neces-
sary then, they are demanded now. "LOwndes'
seems to forget that in making a compromise,
righ,s can be waived. Concession of rights is
the very ground Of all compromise. In the
formation Of our constitution-the chart of our
rights and the bond of our Union-prejucices
had to be overcome, preconceived opinions aban-
doned, conscientious scruples waived and i'm
portant rights sacrificed Who regrets the sacri-
fees that were then made! The North and the
South, the East and the West were required to
make concessions. Their preferences and pre-
JUDGES, their rights and interests were laid cheer
fully on the altar of liberty, and upon the ruins
Of despotism and oppression, the temple of free
dom was soon reared, with its broad foundations
resting for their support upon the pillars of
justice, equality and STATE sovereignty.
After all, the real issue between "Lowndes"
and myself is very simple one. He is opposed
to and am in favor of The adoption of the Mis-
souri, compromise line, MS the basis on which the
difficulties between the North and the South
ought to be adjusted. With an interested and
active majority against us at the North, and a
dissatisfied and restless minority against us at
the South, we are forced, as | before stated,
ethe- 10 submit, or resist, on 10 compromise Un-
der all the circumstances, agree with the Nash
vile convention, that it is the interest of the
South, although the "course is open to grave
objections to "acquiesce in the adoption of the
line of SO deg. 80 min. north latitude, as an ex-
IRENE concession, upon considerations Of what
is due to the stability Of our Institutions"
HANCOCK