The daily union., 1854-02-16
From the Mobile (Ala.) Register.
The Question Of Agitation.
NEW JERSEY.

From Mobile (Ala.> Register
The Question Of Agitation.
The principle involved in the Nebraska bill introduced
by Senator Douglas may not be understood BY many
OF our readers We propose to state the question as
briefly and clearly as able. When understood
the spurious indignation got up about it at he North will
be estimated il its true value and dspassonale will
view with woader that some OF The leading spirits OF The
Casle Garden movement in New York, and some Of the
leading persons in favor of compromise aud union in 1850
are now prominent in agitation The Nebraska question
Charity bids arrive the conclusion that these per
do not understand the subject They are certainly
inconsistent.
The territory Of Nebraska and Kansas cedsd te
the United States oy France under the little Of the Terri
tory OF Louisiana, and included the present States
Louisiana Texas, Arkansas. Missouri, &c This treaty
of purchase effected by Mir Jefferson in lso3l with
Napoleon. Ia all this territory slavery existed under the
French laws long before it's cesson and al The period OF
the purchase slavery existed in nearly all the States OF
the Union---New York and Massachusetts, among the
rest The treaty under which Louisiana acquired
contained nothing altering the status of slavery here,
and its purchase by government of slave States did no,
OF course have any effect abolish prohibit slavery
When Missouri, part of this territory, applied for
admission State into the Union, the antsavery feel
ing of the North first manifested itself This in
1sl92o and a, that time of the northern States
having pushed of and sold their slaves further South
had become noculated with free solsm,' which cost
them nothing and had provided for abolition within
their own boniers.
The ree-soiers OF 1920 objected to the admission Of
Missouri the ground tha, the r io of the Louisiana
territory recognising slavery, was incorporated in the
States constitution. The question question Of self
govsrnment. Had the people OF Missouri right or not
10 determine for themselves this INTERNAL social and po.
liica question: The free-soilers said no. aud main.
tanned The gh, OF the federal government to tmple upon
the great democratic principle OF seIigovernmen, and to
to judge for the people of Missouri what ustu
tions best for them. The result was the Compro
mise OF 1870. known as the Missouri Compromise, By
which Missouri admitted without restriction as TO
slavery, and by which il agreed that thereafter sa-
very should I've prohibited north Of 80 3O the southern
boundary of Missouri. This was northern measure,
and passed against the protest and OF the South
the South conlendng that il violation OF the con-
s,iuiion. governmental attack upon southern insti-
iu,ions and denial OF the democratic principle Of self.
government Bat while the South protested against IT,
when became law they acquesced in the decision, and
for thirty years faithfully abided by The Compromise.
When Texas was admitted, although, by the Louisiana
treaty. the whole OF that leuioy slave, the South
consented the application of the Missouri line, cutting
OF slavery in ths, part OF the territory north OF The line.
In 1850 the California question up. The agia-
ton again renewed and, in the face OF the Missouri
Compromise, The North insisted that California should
come in 'iree-so!l, although It's southern boundary fell
below 80 deg 30 min The violence OF the struggle is
fresh the public recollection, and it resulted in
promise by which the South usual made another
render BY which the abrogalon Of the principle OF the
Missouri Compromise elected, and in return for
which, the North agreed TO e.enac the clause OF the
constitution requiring the rendition OF fugitive slaves
In This controversy, the South insisted The old BAT
gain OF 1870 The South very Justly said, were
ehiseed by tha, compromise when il was made our
rights and the constitution suffered by we have since
lost Territory by The operation Of IT, but we have faith.
uly adhered H. and now for the sake Of peace let us
II, and out the line the Pacific But the
voice OF and justice drowned IN The fanatic
howl which hlled the ear OF Congress. The Missouri
Compromise was ovenidden, and the new Compromise
OF 1850 established And it established because the
North believed that climate, soil, and latitude would for
ever stie the question in favor OF iee. soil" in all the
Territories TO be afterwards admitted. The question
now up again in the organization Of Nebraska and
Kansas Territories This territory north OF 80 30 bal, il
adioins the slave State Of Missouri, and the eesoers
dread the effect OF this proximity in the character of IL
population. Now, by The Compromise OF 1850, the sub
ect OF free or slave labor is left 10 The people of the Ter
tory, when they ready to adopt Stale consultation
In exac, and literal conformity TO this principle, Mr.
Douglas has framed and reported his Nebra,kl bill And
now, The agiiaors finding that lhe Compromise Of 1850
may promo,e slave extensions lake groand against 4 az
promptly they did against the Compromise OF 20,
when that operated 10 the way in respect to The
southern portion Of California They now fall upon the