The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-01-26

the principle OF cong ressona nonniervention only
adopted 10 settle The question to Utah and New Mex
eo. then whatever force belonged 10 the Missouri Com
promise. whether legal moral. belongs to II still out
side OF Utah and New Mexico Ga the other hand. il
the principle which was adopted as 10 Utah and New
Mexico was Intended fixed and universal rule OF
future action in regard 10 all Territories. then the Mis-
sour Compromise suspended by The principle OF the
Compromise OF 1885, and Judge Douglass bill as il now
stands is in strict accordance with the truth of history.
and sets forth the meaning and effect OF the Compro
mise of 1850.
We must say that ii the Compromise oil 1850 did no
more than settle the question Of slavery as 10 Uah and
New Mexico, the country has given it an Importance
far beyond lis merits We cannot consent to poposi.
ton which detracts much from the value OF the pat
riotc exerlions OF the asrous statesmen living and
dead, who participated in that settlement. When the
democratic party united at Baltimore upon the decara
lion that they woad adhere 10 and abide by the compro-
mise OF 1850, and further, pledged themselves
TO resist all further agitation of the slave question: did
they simply that the question of slavery
tied as regarded Utah and New Mexicoi or did they
mean TO assert principle which 10 be Of permanent
and universal application, and which would forever
stand in the Of slavery agitation. ia Congress
OF III Judge Douglass original and his amended bill
both proceeded upon The idea that the principles OF the
Compromise Of 1850 be regarded of permanent
application aud therefore necessarily suspending the
operation Of the Missouri Compromise. In this view
we cordially concar. and risk little in saying that
President Pierce regarded bis election in any other
light than endorsement Of the principles of the
Compromise OF 1850 final settlement of the slavery
question To this position he feels that he
committed himself when he accepted the Baltimore
ina,ion and by this position have no doubt he will
stand firmly and faithfully.
And why should any democrat hesitate to carry out
the principle OF congressional non intervention! II is
principle which secures 10 the people in Territory all
their reserved rights Surely shall be told by
any other than abotonis that the principle OF self
government. applicable the inhabitants of territory
south of 30 deg 80 min is right, but that on the north
side Of The line ii is wrong Undoubtedly it will not be
insisted that the Compromise OF 1850 was acquesced in
by any portion OF the Union upon any such construction
that We know that there abolitonis,s now re.
lying upon the sacredness of the Missouri Compromise
who utterly repudated long they INDUCED hope
Of making the prohibition of slavery in the Territories
universal They sought to apply the Wilmot proviso to
all territory. Having failed in that effort they are now
10 preserve tHdt pTsUtSO OI
This abolition policy and abolition justice, but have
yet to be convinced that any democrat will be found
lribuiing such policy It has been the boast of de-
mocracy tina, destroyed the Wlmot poviso by the pas
sage of the Compromise Of 1850. With how much truth
they boast they only destroyed in the small
of territory TO which il applicable in Utah and New
Mexico! We know that there is strong anti-savery
feeling at the Norlhnot feeling that would interfere
with the institution of slavery either in the States Ter
rtoes where il already exists but feeling Of oppos
lion 10 the extension OF the institution TO territory where il
does new exist Judge Douglass bill neither legsates
slavery into out OF Nebraska. II does no more than
the inhabitants of the Territory the right de-
terrnine the question for themselves, untrammeed and
unembaassed by congressional Intervention proposes
do than to vndicas The sincerity and fidelity
OF the democratic party in their adherence to the prnc
plies of the COMPROMISE of 1850.