Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-02-09

hOiuer5 10 bWlnuie the NOrtn, Iat conuract
will turn the current Of his thoughts TO peace,
and you may expect to see him soon the very
apostle Of harmony and concord
And in this way do these patriotic schemers
in Congress- who do 50 love and reverence the
People, practically affront and dishonor them.
DISREGARD OF HISTORICAL TRUTHS
The effrontery with which the advocates Of
the repeal Of the Compromise Of 1920 reiterate
statements fatty contradicted by History, is
unparalleled The Richmond (Va) Enquirer
speaks Of the legislation Of $50 as Compro-
mise and says
81 Let the patriotic men of the free States
pause and ponder upon this truth. 1t is one
that cannot be set aside, and one that all gem
uine lovers of the Constitution should bear in
their memories and in their hearts. The
remedy for peace in 1850 was most reluctantly
accepted By many in tho South. 1t originated
in the North, and was finally carried by North
ern uOtes. Let not the North be terrified into
dishonoring itself by attempting to destroy the
principle upon which we then marched through
disaster to concord and union
Compromise fhe Omnibus Bill, as it was
styled, was framed as Compromise, and in
tended to be passed as such; but we all know
that it broke down in the Senate. The meas
ures which constituted the Compromise were
subsequently, taken up, separately at different
times, underwent many notifications; some Of
them indeed, were entirely substituted. No
body claimed that they constituted Compro-
mise The Washington Union, then edited by
Thomas Richie, father Of the principal editor
Of the Enquirer, contained at one time an edi-
torial in which the term Compromise, as APP
Piled to the acts Of 1850, was secuted. They
constituted an Adjustment, not Compromise,
said the venerable editor.
Nor did the scheme Of adjustment originate
in the North, or with Northern members.
Henry Clay was emphatically it's originator.
Prominent men at the North were dragged
into the support Of it.
Nor was it finally carried by Northern
votes" The Utah Bill t0ithout the Proviso,
was carried by Southern votes, and limited
number of Northern votes. The Teras Bound
airy Bill and the Nsw MEXICO Bill, without the
Proviso, were carried by Southern manage
ment and Southern votes, aided By Northern.
The California Bill was carried by Northern
votes with limited number Of Southern. The
Slave Trade Bill was carried by the North
against the South; and the Fugitive Slave Bill,
by the South against the North.
These are facts, which can be established by
the record.
But what is the use The scheme for re-
pealing the Missouri Compromise rests upon
no argument, but upon reasons which no logic
can reach
THE POSITION OF THE ADMINISTRATION DE-
FINED.
Southern journals are kind enough to ac.
quaint the Public with the position of General
Pierce on the Question Of Repeal, and also
with the reasons why he was placed in the
Presidential Chair. Welearn from them that he
is the President of the South, not Of the Union J.
and that his position in favor Of Repeal is but
the fulflment Of his oath Of allegiance to the
South. Hear the Richmond (Va) Enquirer
discourse:
@The Nebraska Bin-Position Of the admin
istration lit is fortunate for the South that in
the impending struggle with Abolitonism, it
will not encounter the opposition Of the Execu-
tive branch Of the Federal Government We
speak not without authority, when we assert
that in respect to the proposition for the repeal
of the Missouri restriction the Administration
occdpies no neutral or adverse ground. The
amendment to the Nebraska bill, which re-
stores to the South the rights that were sur
rendered by the Compromise Of 1920, has the
express and emphatic sanction Of the President,
and the whole power of his Administration is
pledged to its support. The South could ex-
pect nothing less Of President Pierce The least
abandonment Of the highest ground, in respect
TO the constitutional rights Of the South, would
not only be inconsistent with the uniform tenor
of his past course, but would involve q viola
ton of the generous confidence which the South
reposed in the character of MIR. Pierce.
aMr. Pierce was the nominee Of the South
ern Democracy, and he was selected with q
special reference to the protection of the rights
Of the South 1t was thought, and, as time
will demonstrate, IL was thought not without
reason, that of all the true men Of the North,
Mr. Pierce possessed in largest measure the
will and the capacity TO arrest the encroach.
ments Of Abolitionism. His nomination was in
no respect and in no degree the result Of chance
or inconsiderate action. In giving him their
support Southern men consulted their own in
terests, and his unsupported soundness on the
Slavery question contributed moro than any
thing else to his triumphant election. IL was
impossible, therefore, after such evidences Of
confidence on one side, and obligation on the
other, to expect that Mr.. Pierce would do
otherwise than he has done in respect to the
Nebraska question. In espousing the cause Of
the South in this controversy, he but vindicates
the consistency Of his public life, and redeems
his pledge TO the country"
Were the President committed against the
bill, every one here knows that it would never
pass He Is committed to its support, and this
is Why the Northern men here, who call them
selves Democrats, are relied upon by the Slave
LolIo~x. Lnnuv khos~ oxvv. <,.,o~ IL