Washington sentinel., 1854-01-13

after the other-so that we cannot be charged
with unfairness.
To us it seems that the abolition and free
soil objections to the Nebraska bill are nothing
more than factious opposition to the Baltimore
platform. Our readers will remember, that
when We first published the Nebraska bill, we
stated that it would accomplish much good,
even if it had no other effect than TO force
skulking politicians to show their hands. We
are pleased TO see that it has had that effect
already; for it has compelled, as far as we can
Judge, direct expression Of sentiment on the
principles of the Baltimore platform, and ex-
posed the mean pretences of the New York
freesoilers.
The National Era and the Albany Atlas
/ now insist on a faithful adherence TO the Mis-
souri, compromise. We admit that the Mis-
souri, compromise was intended as permanent
adjustment of the slavery controversy. But
vet, if we have read history Alright, no party ever
adopted that compromise in its creed; and the
only sanctity it ever had, was that which it
gained by long period of acquiescence.
But Notwithstanding that long period of ac-
quiescence, freesoi fanaticsm repudiated it
when Oregon became territory of the United
States.
When the bill TO give Oregon territorial
sentatives, Mr.. Winthrop, of Massachusetts,,
moved to apply to it the anti-slavery prohibi.
ton of the ordinance Of l7s7-which is word
for word the Wilmot proviso, When that mo-
ton was carried, many able and patriotic men
thought that it was virtual repeal of the Mis-
souri, compromise. But Mr.. Polk signed the
bllwith the offensive clause in it, ON the ground,
as he stated in special message, that Oregon
was north of the Missouri compromise line,
which was intended to be a permanent adjust
ment Of the slavery question, and that the Win
throp proviso was mere surplusage.
Freesoilism having gained thus much by the
Missouri compromise, refused to abide by that
compromise any further; for when the Mexican
treaty gave us California, and New Mexico, and
Utah, every effort to extend the principles Of
the Missouri compromise was most violentlyre-
sisted and that compromise was virtually abb
rogated, and its binding force denied and repu-
dated. This abrogation Of the Missouri com
promise-this denial and reputation of its
binding force made it necessary that NEW
COMPROMISE should be made.
That NEW COMPROMISE was made in 1850, and
it has been sustained to the present time But
all on sudden, the freesoilers who have pre-.
tended for the long space of FOUR MONTHS to
be better and truer democrats than the long
tried veterans of the democracy, now come forth
and speaking through their organ, the Albany
atlas, spit on the compromise of 1850, which is
recognised as fnality by the Baltimore plat.
form, and insist that it must give place to the
Missouri compromise of ls2Oll
We congratulate the Washington Union on
the good behaviour of its new associates; and
we wish it a happy deliverance from the task
it has undertaken to coax the Albany atlas
into silence or retraction, or to reconcile the
freesoilism Of its colleague to present exigen-
cies.
But we have not space to say more at
present. Tomorrow we will publish the arti-
cles we have already alluded to, from the
National Era and the Albany Atlas, when we
will have an opportunity Of directing public at
tention to some matters which we can not
treat of this morning.