Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1854-02-16

|
cents copy
GyP Yearly advertisers are restricted to their le-
| gitinate business. Other advertisements will be
charged at regular rates.
| E15@ No charge for inserting deaths, but a
charge Of fifty cents per square will be made for
obituary notices.
| n-y5 The charge for marriage notices is left TO
! The bridegroom, and will be acknowledged in The
paper.
| NY7 Where editorial notice of advertisements
is requested, 1t will be given and charged for.
Nebraska-Speech of Senator Douglas.
On the 3Oth January, Senator Douglas
made a great speech in defence of his terri
torial bills TO organise Kansas and Nebras-
ka, in which is contained section repeal
ing or declaring imperative the Missouri
Compromise of 1920.
The speech is very long-too long for
our present restricted limits-but the sub
iect is too important to permit his remarks
to pass without notice. We have therefore
endeavored to separate the argument Of
Mr.. Douglas on the points of law involved,
from a mass of personalities, differences and
collateral matters, with which the entire
speech abounds.
In order to understand the speech of Mr..
Douglas the better, it is needful to premise
that Messrs. Sumner and Chase, of the Sc
nate, and Wade, Giddings, Smith of New
York, and Dewitt, of Massachusetts, Of the
House Of Representatives had published a
manifesto protesting against the Douglas
Territorial bill, and declaring that the prop
ositon to repeal the Missouri Compromise
was "gross violation of plighted faith."--
Judge Douglas, conceiving this address TO
contain reflections on himself, answers it
with severity, and throughout his speech
styles its signers abolition conrederates."
We proceed with his speech:-[ Intelli-
gencer.
"The address asserts that it was the origi-
nal policy Of this country to prohibit slave
ry in all the territories of the United States,
and refers to the territory northwest of the
Ohio river as evidence of this declaration.
The authors of the address were very care
tul to conceal from their readers, while ma
king this statement, the fact that the early
policy Of the county was, not only to pro-
hibit slavery north of the Ohio river, but
TO tolerate and protect it in the territories
south of that river, as is seen by the res
pective acts Of 1877 and l79O-the one pro-
hibiting slavery in the Northwest Terrific
ry, the other tolerating and protecting it in
the Southwest territory. Thus, it win be
seen that, instead of its being the policy Of
this government, as established by its foun-
ders, to prohibit slavery in all the territories
of tie United States, their policy was far
different. 1t waste settle all disputes upon
the slavery question by geographical line
north of which slavery was to be prohibit,
ed and south of which it was to be per,
, mitted. 1t is not my purpose, on this part
of the question, TO enter into the CORRECTNESS,
of that policy. TO inquire as to whether ;
geographical line or sound principle woult
nave uecl tlIe oest inCdIIS VI stltItlIelIt'-
1t is sufficient for my present purpose tha
such was the example set by the early ia
theirs Of the Republic. That geographical
line--the Ohio river--whch settled tn
= question in all the territories originally be
2 longing to the United States, extending a
far West as our territories then extended
saSyit: the Mississippi river. When sub
-~f fuently, we obtained possession of III
: Louisiana territory by a cession from France
i the question of slavery remained quiet 70
: some years, but eventually arose upon III
r admission of Missouri into the Union as
: State.
The effort was made on the part Of North
ern men to fix that geographical line on tn
southern boundary Of Missouri, and to IL
F. sist upon Missouri territory remaining
free territory, or otherwise be kept out
v the Union. That controversy was settle
n by following the example of the founders {
: the republic--by prescribing Biographies
line which was to be the boundary betwee
the free States and the slave States, runnin
= indefinitely westward as far as our terri
tory might extend. That line has since bee
known as the Missouri Compromise line
Its merit was, not that it simply ran throug
the country ceded to us from France, know
as the Louisiana territory, but the objec
was to accomplish far more desirable enc
# that Of settling the slavery question for eve
7 by running that line as far as our territor
n might extend. The Missouri Compromis
u line was thus observed rs a means of avoid
ing all agitation of slavery until the CUES
ton again rose upon the annexation OF Tex
> as to the United States. While the exter
sion of that line through Texas was not
matter of any practical importance SO fl
l. as he question of slavery wos involved, y