The daily union., 1854-02-18
The North and tho south.

We believe that il is The ardent wish of the masses Of
both Of the political parties, North and South, the
question of slavery finally and efec,ualy settled aod
excluded from their respective organizations 1t is not
so material howshe question is settled, provided it
done to be satisfactory and permanent In the nvesi-
cation OF The practicaby OF such settlement, il is
srhal that should understand distinctly the points
which the northern and southern minds agree, and those
which they disagree. and the exact grounds OF their
disagreement
We think il may be safely assumed lha, the people Of
the North and The South agree the opinion that there
certain fixed laws Of climate and of production which
determine the permanency OF the existence or nonex-
isience Of African slavery in any and every locality.
Drawing their deductions from these known laws, we
believe The opinion is very nearly unanimous. North and
South thai the institution OF slavery cannot become per-
maneny established in the Nebraska Territory II
this be so, il is clear that the question involved in The
territorial bis before Congress loses much OF its
practical importance.
In this view of The subject it is rather strange that
anything like sectional difference, bordering on aga.
on should exist in making provisions for the govern
Of the Territory The questions may be pertnenly
asked II the permanent existence of slavery depend
en-, las, upon The fixed laws OF Nature why should the
By congressional prohibon' Or, on the other hand,
why should the South demand that the congressional
prohibition shall not be made, il by the laws OF climate
aud production slavery cannot permanently ess, in the
rernofy The answers 10 these questions will bring TO
view the actual grounds OF disagreement
To the irstqueson The Of the northern man is
that by act OF Congress passed under circumstances
OF peculiar soienni,y. and acquesced in as a com
promise for more Aan Thirty years, slavery excluded
forever from The Nebraska territory. In other wotas,
that Nebraska is free soil by operation OF law and
the sentiment, OF the Moth will not tolerate the conver-
sion of free into slave territory Ny congressional action
This. however, is begging the question. We have as
sumtd, point agreed on, tha, slavery as
institution is impraclicsbe in Nebraska By virtue Of The
laws Of Nature. Wha', then. the act decariag the
territory forever free soil be repealed does that con-
vert il into alave territory Surely not unless The re-
peal o the acl Of 1870 evyes and reinstaes The Lous-
ana law which tolerated slavery. But the bill expressly
avoids this consequences by repeating as well the Los
law tolesting slavery the Missouri law prohibit.
ing H. By the bill therefore, Ntbraska il a. eIectusly
feeso territory after it's passage as il Is under the
Missouri Compromie, but with this difference under
The bill the Territory may continue to be free soil or not
at the pleasure Of its inhabitants; under the Missouri
Compromise il can never be anything but ffeesoil.
no matter what may be The pleasure of the Inhabi
ants. Bat practically there is difference in The
result. under the Nebraska bill OF under the Missouri
Compromise. Under the Nebraska bin the inhabitants
have the right to establish slavery in the Territory
bu, j, is agreed that they cannot exercise This right,
because the laws OF Nature render the permanent
establishment Of slavery ia that latitude mpraciica
ut. A.. ~
is rendered mpraehcable because The law Of that Com
promise, as well as the laws oil Nature forever prohst
it's existence. NA
Will occnr readily TO every observer Of the scenes Of
1860 hat the ,aeaca difficulty which then presented a.
sell Ia presented again. Ihsa it was maintained BY MI
Clay end Mr. Webster, and by the northern mind gene
rally. thai The Mexcan law in in the new ter
rioy. and that by il slavery excluded. The gene