The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-26


Union revos the idea OF disturbing the Missouri COM
pact and by implication reads other entire section Of
the Union lecture for lis disposition to break its
plghted faith. The argument OF the Lteihgsnesr is
ingenious as lis attack upon the South is nsdious-the
one. however, just fallacious the other IS
merled.
Our neighbors seem 10 attach much importance TO the
remossirances pouring into Congress against the
Nebraska bill, indications Of the popular sentiment IN
those sections from whence they come Indeed, il is
upon this species OF evidence that they arrive aJhe con-
euson 'lhai in whole region Of the country the
Legislation of 1920 is regarded of those compacts
which have repeatedly taken place in the adjustment OF
the conflicting interests represented in the Congress OF
the United States" We had supposed that the long po-
cal experience OF the editors OF that Journal had taught
them that remonsranees addressed Congress furnish
the lusory indications public sentiment The
facility with which they gotten up prove1ba, and
the frequency with which they found to be in direct
conflict with he sober second thought" of the people,
have long since warned to receive them as the
lowest species OF evidence OF popular sentiment II re
and protests and petitions had been here
tofoe reliable indexes of public opinion, should now
see in operation national bank, protective tariff, and
general system of internal improvements. When the
Iteigeneer, therefore, that entire section
OF the Union is opposed to The Nebraska bill, and relies
upon the evidence OF the fact furnished by petitions and
all the conclusions il may draw from
such premises must be thrown into discredit
But the Inesencsr is not less uDf fortunate in s'argu-
ment than in its assumption of facts In much that it
says as TO the value and obligation OF compromises we
readily agree. We know that is only by cultivating
spirit OF compromise in legislation that involv
ing great principles be perfected and carried into OPP
Grafton When the popular mind becomes agltated on
any sectional question, this spirit comes into play
and becomes the conservative instrument for restoring
peace and repose the country. Questions settled
in this way ought not 10 be rashly inconsd
eralely disturbed. The OF the Intsligencr con-
sists in overlooking the real OF the South in
regard to the Missouri Compromise and in seeming to
forget tina, only after that compromise, final
adjustment Of the slavery question, repudated by
large portion OF the Morrill, that the South looked TO the
principle Of the Compromise OF 1850 furnishing the
permanent rule for the future action OF The government
When Mexican territory was acquired, the South in
sisted making the Missouri line, extended TO the Pa
cc the basis of settling the slavery question be agu
aents which that proposition was then urged were
substantially those which the IseHigeneer relies
for observing the obligatory character Of that
promise 1t will be remembered that it not until
this proposition rejected-and that, too, mainly
by northern votes-lhal the Compromise OF 1850 was
adopted No truth OF history Is better established
than that the South accepted the Compromise OF
1850 as permanent adjustment, and as superse-
due principle, of all other rules OF settlement In this
state of the case, papaby unjust 10 charge by
that the South acting in bad faith in insist
ing on the application OF the principle Of the Compromise
of 1850 to the Nebraska territory. That is the legitimate
consequence OF the understanding of the bargain BY the
South when that compromise made. II the North
accepted il with different understanding, IT only proves
that the settlement was only temporary and local. in
stead OF final and universal. II il true, errone
ousy supposed by the Inl.gsns that the whole North
rates as repeal OF The Missouri restriction, The
ground OF its being regarded sacred compact then
with equal truth il may be said lha, the South is insist
ing on The principle of the Compromise OF 1850. on the
ground tina, there regarded sacred compact, The
sincerity OF The South in urging this position ought not
10 be when it is apparent that the extension OF
slave territory is not its object.
II we assume 1t 10 be established that entire
ton of The Union opposes The Nebraska bill because
violates the compact OF 1890. and that the other entire
section OF the Union ADVOCATES
the compact OF $780, is presented where the great
principle which enabled fathers TO COM
promise on a constitution ought again TO be invoked.
No matter what sentiments may prevail as TO the
institution of slavery, canaot with truth be said that
The question whether slavery shall be extended orreslc
ed is involved in the Nebraska bill There is nothing
in the controversy, therefore, which justify excite
nent or agitation. What all true desire is the es-
OF permanent rule By which every question
Of the kina may be solved One Of the chief
eudaions OF The COMPROMISE OF 1880 10 mind
was that based upon compact that violated The
constitution. Willis have constantly advocated the
exercise OF spiril Of compromise all sectional ques
lions, have never doubted that a compact which did
upon constitutional basis would prove unsats
factory and Intellectual. Such compacs may operate ten
porarly to calm agitation and peace and quiet,
out they never permanent epose. The cou-
tuton itself derives much Of s sancit from the Tact
hat il the result Of compromise Of conflicting sen.
imen,s and rnterestr such compromises may well be
made in order fundamental Law after that
is thus secured, compromise which violates it's
provisions be safely made. Il is well known that
arge portion OF people have always regarded The
Missouri restriction violation of the consultation
Whether this opinion is well founded or not, IT is
known to he extensively and honestly entertained Tnis
knowledge, il TO Us, ought have lie weight in
eeking solution OF presen, difficulties The non.
principle farnishe. basis Of settlement