The daily union., 1854-02-14


nonnleyenon to be ths established rule in regard
to all future territorial governments MIR Everett must
have confined his reading in tho years 1850 aud lsolto
books in which other subjects investigated Asa lair
specimen OF the view taken of the compTomss measures
BY the press OF the country, may be padoned for ma
king extract from editorial 10 The Wsshinxtoa
Union the goth day Of October $780, when this paper
conducted by that veteran editor and able political
writer. Thomas Richie, esq The extract is follows;
:" The Compromise be sustained in all Its parts
and must be sustained not simply serles OF measures
providing for the admission of California, the reclamation
ofgitye slaves, territorial governments for Utah and New
Mexico and the settlement OF the Texas boundary; butt
must be sustained treaty Of peace and amisy adjust
ug the principles OF future action and binding tho federal
government stay It's hands from meddng with slave in
stitutons. These peace were not intended
simply heal the particular aud specific wounds which
afflicted the country during the first session Of the Thirty
first Congress- but they intended 10 provide Tor the
future, by establishing rule for the settlement of all the
questions which grow OF slave institutions We there
fore contend that the Compromise will be violated only
in the repeal of the ugyesave law but Ia either Of hs
following cases se sBsa :
81" When the iugitiye-slave bill is repealed rendered
Intellectual;
90 When STATE is refused adrnitancs because its
stituton admits slavery; a9ts 8SaNa F8
"5 When slavery is abolished in the District Of Coium-
- When Congress attempts to regulate tho slaysrade
between the States; n
"5. When Congress attempts interfere with slavery in
the States or, NatgHf4 I'll i&aS
80 When it imposes the Wllmot proviso the Terri
tories.
To up all these in proposition, II appears us
that COMPROMISE VIOLATED WHENEVER ygDERAL
GOVERNMENT DEPARTS PRINCIPLE OF INTERvxN-
rIon" e ss. w est
Day after day the subject was presented to the
country in this light. not only the Union. but in the
journals throughout the country. Yet Mr. Everett
formed the idea, conceived The hougbt that these
measures furnished rule for the final settlement OF
the slavery question! 6aag
But Mr. Everett appeals TO the debates in Congress,
and there find evidence that tho territorial bills of
1850 intended furnish rule for future action by
Congress- AS far can discover, however, his in
vestigaton has gone no further than 10 what Mr..
Webster said these bills and that point we have
word 10 say directly. AT present wish to call his At
tenton TO the report made by Mr. Clay. az chairman Of
the Committee Of Thirteen. In that celebrated document
we fnd that Mr. Clay pressed the passage OF the compro
mise upon the distinct ground that they would
accomplish general adjustment Of all the questions con-
nected with slavery Prominent amongst these was the
Wilmot-poyiso question in regard to the Territories
On this subject, Mr. Clay said in his report: . gdr
SIT ishigh time that the wounds which Il (he Wnmot
proyiso) has inflicted should be healed up and closed and
that TO avoid in all future the axitaons which must be
produced by the conflict Of opinion the slavery question.
the principle which ought regulate the actIon OF
Congress in forming territorial for each newly
acquired domain is to refrain from all legislation the
subject the territory acquired long a Il vvtsns the
territorial form of government, leaving it the people
such territory, when they have attained condition which
entities them admission as State, decide ios them
selves the question OF the allowance probabilities of do
mesic slavery" 81 Aasts ,eT
II will be seen that MIR. Clay lays down rsle for
uniform and universal acion--not applicable only to-
Utah and New Mexico. but to each newy-acqursd do
man." Yet Mr Everett says he could find nothing
from which appears that any member OF Congtses BE-
eved that those territorial were intended TO
furnish rule principle TO act in any way upoa our
other territories, whether reospectveIy or psospscvsiy
But Mr. Everett appeals to Mr.. Websisrs greet spsech
Of March 7th, 1850. delivered long before the comwo-
mise brought forward This reference il
made to show that Mr. Webster did not support the
Utah and New Mexico bills supersedure OF the Com.
promise OF 1920. The argument this point 10 exceed.
ngy obscure and unsatisfactory But has another fea-
ture which is Ii puts cons'ructon on Mr.
Websiers language which he intended Il 10 bear
AS quoted by Mr. Everett the language Of Mr. Webster
is this, 49,
And now say. as the proposition upon which stand,
and upon the truth and lHness of which inssnd 10 act
until IL is overhrown. that there IL not nj this
within The United States Territories Of The United
States single foot of and the character of which. In
gard its being soil territory territory not
fixed by law and ire peaabe law bsyood the
power aud action Of the government"
Commenting upon this extract, Mr.. Everett says: A.
He meant Of course, give the Missouri restriction
the character Of compact which tho in good
faith, could not repeal There great deal said
to the same purpose"
II will be seen iha, Mr.. Everett makes Mr.. Webster
treat the Missouri Compromise ah "epesabls law !"
and, TO help out his construction, he nerpolses the idea
that Mr. Webster regarded the Missouri res,r,cison as
compact which the government, could not in good faith
repeal" II not the habit OF Mr. Webster 10 state
his positions obsourey 10 require his meaning to be
arrived a, by such interpretations Mr. Everett has done
him great injustice 10 his attempt 10 Torture bis language
into his service. Upon turning to Mr.. Websers speech
OF March J, 1850. printed in the Conarni5~ Gisds.
find the ceares, proof tha, Mr.. Everett has put
construction on his language which never Intended
by him MIR Webster had argued the question OF sa-
very in California and New Mexico as follows.
"Now as to Ca ifomis and New Mexico. hold SLAVERY
TO be excluded om those Territories by law even supe.
ror 20 that which admit and il In TsxasI ms.n
the law Of Nameof physical gcogmphy-the a OF this
formation OF The earth. That law settles forever with
strength beyond all Of human enactmen that sl.
very cannot exist ia California or New Mexico" -ft
Following this Argument the conclusion quoted
he M Er. and IL r. Il.