The Texas Republican. [volume] (Marshall, Tex.) 1849-1869, 1854-03-18

4.
was a common argument Of thoss ~. y
ls50. denounced all opposition n -
Compromise as disunion. that ;ne Snsa.
opponents Of that measure allil;sa.1 ~
the Freesoilers. ~ they were both s,,.'',
against the same measure. 'rh>r,
never a particle Of logic in this pvs,,..s'.
The Fscesoilers were opposed 10 u, c.
promise, because it conceded anvtai....
all to the Sou.h--ths SoutAsrn 49,.
Rights men were opposed to il bscs...
conceded too little. Certainly, h =.
grounds OF their opposition, there VI, 4.
little approach to utilization.
This logic retarns upon those who ,sa,,
In the South. there are some p0lit,cis,. A.,
journals two Of the latter in our on. .;,',
who were the most violent tenoune...
all opponents Of the Con,prom'se, o1 F..
.cilers, and Southern Rights men, ssd y.
who now deplorc tho introduction Of i.
Nebraska Bill, and actually abuss ~
who hare been instrumental in brins,,. !,
forward. So do the Freeaoilevs. Nos
is the Freeso,lers and original Comma
sers who travel in the same coach. SA,n
we use their old agrumen, Shall We .l,.
.ify our neighbors, the Crescent and hi
le,in, with the New York Tribsn~ Al
Pos,i No; we will not, but Ne will conn
sel them to refresh their memories.
II is objected that this is an unneee,,.,,
agitation, got up by Mr. Douglas to ro
mote his Presidential aspirations. W.
have always set Douglas down a. . pex,,
shrewd politician; bu: we should bs com.
PEELED to change our opinion. il he sho,Id
pretend that his chances for the Pres;d.o.,
would be improved by taking the Sou,b,,,
side in this controversy. The man. vho
is to be elected to the Presidency 10, Il.
advocacy OF the rights of the South IA,
We, to be born. Samuel Houston, 4 ds..,
mined asprant Tor that high position, Ia,
struck out much surer road to il, than III.
Illinois Senator by trucking to Frse Soil
But even it this were the motive OF n,
Douglas, we maintain that the deed i An
honorable and ptaiseworthy one, and that
to seek to attain the Presidency by jur.
fair, and honorable conduct, is meri,or,ou,
and co,nmendahie.
Bu, it is pretended by certain journal.
in the South, led off by the National In.sl
lreucer, that the agitation Is an unnsce,>
sary one. Do they forget that the peopls
who are fast settling this new territory ars
loudly calling Tor its organization. that. u
present, this territory is without law 0,
government, and that il is the duty 0
Congress, to form some government ove
/, at this session In the performance o
this duty, our Legislators encounter . seri
Gus obstacle in the difficulty which Mr.
Douglas proposes to remove, TO wit, III
doubt as to the application 81 Ii
Missouri Compromise to this new territc<,
So,ne say the act of 1850 repeats n,
compromise Others contend that il DOE
not. There is no bitter tribunal TO settl
and determine this difficulty than Congss
which passed the bill OF 1880. llenc
this movement is a Necessary, unav oidabl
inevitable one. The agitation il has causs
ough. no, to be deplored, especn lily VIII
!; is seen what an excitement It Great
among the Freesoilers They oppose d
bin, because, they contend, the Mlssou
Compromise is still in force, and to repe
it, (which is not--so they say--done by 4
act OF 1850, would be an act OF bad isii
. Does the south require any better arg
. ment for its repeal
John Van Buren, IN his letter to Glenn,
=, SAYS Douglas bdl is violation of
, pledge OF the Baltimore Convention sgsi
, the agitation OF slavery II such pied,
wefe OF ANY binding force on Congress
the people, or even on party, which
are no, prepared to admit, they could o.
apply to unnecessary and voluntary agi,
ton; they certainly could not mean h
, when new territories came to'be admit,
into the Union, the South should not sta
) by lis rights.
> So much FOR the objections in the Nor
and in the South to u measure, which,
us, seems to be one Of palpabe iustc
t necessity, and sound policy. Della.