The daily union., 1854-02-21

eSc thdn mlsepleVous. we appfchended tbdt Inc wing
senator, Mr. Dixon. aeuated by partisan feelings.
and hence expressed ourselves suspicious OF his
movement. We are now satisfied that we did his mo-
tives and object injustice and that he acluaed BY
patriotic considerations in Offering his amendment We
declared opposition 10 both amendments. and upon
the distinct ground that the BILL originally introduced.
resfrmed and re-enaced the principles OF the Compro-
mise OF $780, and made permanent the doctrine OF nom
Intervention. Whilst satisfied that the princi-
Plies OF the Compromise of 1850 Inconsistent with
the Missouri Compromise, doubted the policy OF de-
clarDg the latter be repealed. because feared that
il might furnish preext for increased efforts al agitation,
and because feared il might be construed into de-
parture from the Compromise of 1850, which contained
no such declaration. The course Of the In,elhgencer
shows that had reason for apprehensons. We
do not support the bill because il declares the
Missouri Compromise 10 be imperative and void, bu,
because enacs The principle OF onnlerventon and,
al that principle is inconsistent with The Missouri Com
promise, the bill is the less acceptable for
declaring. We prefer il in its present shape, simply be.
cause there now be for doubt iis true
consructonjnst as we would have preferred the Com
promise OF 1850 if il had contained similar declaration,
We cordially acquesced in the Compromise of 1850 with
out such declaration, and willing sustain the
Nebraska bill in the way. The following extracts
from article of the goth of January will show how
bera the Integeaeer be when it desires TO make
u false impression:
I'VE free to declare that should have been con-
ea TO the question thus presented left where the Com
proWse Of 1850 and the bill OF Judge Douglas both le
and It would be uncandd in If we did add
clause In the Compromise of 1850 and in Mr. Douglas
Nebraska BILL declaring the Of 1920 null and void be-
cause 1t cohavenes the principle OF congressional nonn
tesvenuon would have made both OF these
in With opinions and wishes But we ac
cepted the acts OF 1850 they passed. and approved
their passage final compromise; and in the same
spirit we have been content with the psspeuaton of
Compromise proposed by Mr. Douglass Nebraska bill
We have never yielded TO the Missouri Compromise any
other obligatory force than that which attaches solemn
entered into by opposing parties
ervatoD OF amicable relations To such considerations
have e bound yield ready acquiescence the
Compromise the law of the land, only in FORM bu,
in substance and reality. Viewed legal question, we
should be constrained it unsusaned by
siutiona authority viewed the evidence Of compro
mise OF conflicting interests and opinions have been
ready waive the legal question, and abide faithfully by
its terms. Ii have studied the southern sentiment
recty this has been the view taken OF the Missouri Com
promise in that division oil the Union
" IL is scarcely necessary for say that, whilst
have yielded the honorary obligation abide by the
Missouri Compromise have doubted its original
adoption was misortune-and tor the that, in
judgment IL stood opposed the constitution and in ad
di,on, undertook prescribe arbitrary line ofdemaca
tion which would have been better left great Of
Nature in accordance with the principle Of
non-inerven,ion. We have aboed under the impe
that these coasde raoDs all fully and mauely weigh
ed in the discussions of 1850 and that the
adopted designed permanent rule for future action
Ii upon this view that gave Mr.. Douglass bill
ready approval and sil think that the peace and
harmony of country will be best by its adop
ton. We free express aversion the
opening OF the slavery question: and we viii believe that
true wisdom dictates that this be best avoided by
standing firmly upon the Compromise of 1850 ad
Justment
" Bot Mr. Dxon's amendment may 10 stir up ex.
element one side, whilst Nj Summers will effect the
have everything gain aud nothing lose, tho upshot
may be that the agitation nure 10 the benefit OF the
common opposition to the democratic party Prudepce
patriotism, devotion Union, that OF the DEM
ocratc paryail suggest that the public which
acquiesces cheeruy in the prime o the Compro
mise of 1850 should not be incousderatey disturbed
The ,riumphsn election Of President Pierce shows that
on this basis the hearts and the judgments the people
with he democracy We may TO suggest that
il is well worthy OF consideration whether faithful adhe
the creed which has been triun phanrly en-
dored by the people does not require all good democrats
hesitate and reflect maturey upon any proposition which
any member OF party object au nle fpoation
spon that creed In word, IL would be wise n all demo
Gratis to consider whether IL would be to 'let
well enough alone To repeal the Missouri Compromse
might and according view would, clear pTino-
pie OF congressional Intervention Of all embarrassment
but doubt whether the good thus promised import.
that would be wise to seek Il through the agitation
which necessarily stands In path Upon . calm review
Of the whole ground, such dis
turbing the Compromise OF 1850 could ioduce us to
advocate either of the proposed Mr. Doug
ass bill"