Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1850-1854, 1854-05-05

But 1t was not superseded; but acknowl
edged and confirmed by every speake
IN 1850 that referred to the subject, an,
by every act that mentioned it. Thi
being matter of fact and proven by a
sorts of testimony-parole, written, an,
record-it had to be given up, (thougl
a test of political orthodoxy as long as
ssood) and something else put in it
place. Thereupon suppression was i,
self superseded by Inconsistent" Gu
OF the frying pan into the fire! Incon
Slstent signifies inability to stand togeth
feF-two things which cannot stand to
gether--from con and s'Sto. Now, wha
Is the fact with respect to the Comprom
lSes of 1920 and 1850! Can they no
stand together! And if moi, why knocl
the one down that is already down! |
is now four Yeas since this inability t
stand together took effect; and how d.
the two sets of measures make out to
gether at the end of this time? Perfect
ly we'll. They are both on their feet
standing bolt upright-and will stanc
SO forever, unless Congress knocks one
or the other of them down. This is fact
known to everybody, and admitted by
the bill itself; for if the first is inconsis
tent with thesecond, and unable to stand
why all this trouble to put it down
Why trip up the heels of the man al
ready flat on his back on the ground
Then comes another reason-that this
compromise of 1920 is imperative and
void. If so, those who are against its
operations should be content. 1t is in
the very condition they wish it-useless
powerless, inactive, dead-and no bar t.
the progress of slavery to the North
VOID Is vacant, empty, nothing Of it.
Now, if the line of SO deg. 80 min. is
imperative and void, it is in the condi-
ton of fence pulled down, and the rails
carried away, and the field left open for
the stock to enter. But the fence is not
pulled down Yet. The line is not yet
imperative and void. 1t is an existing
substantive line, alive and operating and
operating etfectually to bar the progress
of slavery TO the North; and will so con-
time to operate until Congress shall stop
its operation.
Then comes the final reason, tina there
never was any such line in the world
that 1t was unconstitutional and void
that it had no existence from the begin
ming; and that it must not be repealed
10y direct act, for that would be to ac-
knowledge its previous existence, and to
nulhfy the constitutional argument; and,
what Is more terrible, involve the authors
of the doctrine in An inconsistency of
their own; and thereby make them,
themselves, imperative and void. And
this is the analysis Of the reasons for the
Nebraska bill-tllat part of it which is
to get rid Of the Compromise of 1920:
untrue, contradictory, suicidal, and pre-
Posterous. And why such a farrago of
utilities, incongruities, and inconsistent
cies! Purely and simply to throw up
on others-upon the Congress of 1850
and the innocent Constitution. the blame
of what the bill itself is doing the blame
of destroying the Compromise of 1920;
and with it, destroying all confidence
between the North and abe South, and
arraying one-half the Union against the
other in deadly hostility. Its to be able
to throw blame upon the innocent, that
this farrago Is served up to us.
And what is all this hotch-potch for?
1t is to establish principle, they say
the principle of non-intervention-of
s1uatter sovereignty. Sir, there Is no
such principle. The Territories are the
children of the States. They are minors
under twenty-one years of age; and it
is the business of the States, through their
delegations in Congress, to take care Of
these minors until they are of age-un-
til they are ripe for State Government
then give them that Government, and
anmit them to an equality with their
fathers. That is The law, and the sense
of the case; and has been so acknowl-
edged since the first Ordinance in1 794,
by all authorities, Federal and State,
legislative, Judicial, and executive. The
States in Congress arc the guardians Of
the Territories and are bound to exercise
the guardianship, and cannot abdicato
it without II breach of trust and dere-
fiction of duty. Territorial sovereignty
is Il monstrosity, born of timidity and
ambition, hatched into existence In the
hot incubation of Presidential canvass,
and revolving to the beholders when first
presented. Well do | remember that
day when it was first shown in the Sen
ate. Mark Antony did not better re-
member the day when Caesar first put
on that mamie through which he was
afterwards pierced with three-and-twcn-
ty "envious stabs." 1t was in the Sen
ate in l84S, and received us nonsenre
AS the essence of nonsense-as the
quintesSence of nonsenSe-as the five
times distilled essence of political non
sensicality. Why, sir, the Territory it
self is the property of the States, and
they do what they please with it-per-
NIT it to be settled ornot, as they please :;
cut it up by lines, AS they please; sell it,
or give it away, as they please; chase
white people from it, as they please, AT
ter this tarrago-this oNo-po-drida -
comes little stump speech, injected in
the belly of the bill, and which mast
have a prodigious effect when recited in
the praries, and out towards the frontiers,
and up towards The heads of the creeks,
| will read it, and [ hope withoutfati
ing the House; for it is both brief and