Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-03-14
WASHINGTON, ID. C.
TUESDAY, MARCH IA, 1854.
OHIO AND THE NEBRASKA BILL.

OHIO AND THE NEBRASKA BILL
Could the naked question this day be SUBJ
mittcd to the People Of Ohio, Shall the Ne
braska Bill, repeating the Missouri Compromise,
become law nineteen twentieths OF the voters
Of that State would say, no. How happens it
then, that the Legislature Of Ohio does not
say, no?
Let us explain. Owing to the total overthrow
Of the Wing Party at the last Presidential cleo
ton, and its consequent disorganization in Ohio,
the supporters Of the Administration found it
an easy task to carry the State at the last cleo
ton. 1t is true, the Independent Democracy
cast u larger vote than it had ever done before;
but its organization was too recent, and too
imperfect, to cmbody oil the elements of OPP
position to a Party, flushed with victory,
backed by the patronage Of the Federal Gov
eminent, and gith cunning enough not to make
an issue upon the Slavery question. Up to that
moment, that party had refused to adopt the
Baltimore platform. Itstood npon the re-afirm-
alton Of the resolutions Of its State Conyen-
tons, for several successive years, avoving
opposition to Slavery and its extension, thereby
securing the adhesion Of the large majority Of
nti.Slavery Democrats. II is easy to see,
however, that in thus evading an issue in re-
lation to Slavery, and diverting the attention
of the people from all questions connected
with it, candidates for the Legislature and State
Offices would be selected with little reference
to their Anti Slavery or Pro-Slavery opinions,
but rather in view Of their relations to the
Administration, or to the party organization,
or to local questions.
What was the result? Just what might
have been expected. The Administration men
carried the State, threw majority into the
Legislature, which secured to them supremacy,
and this majority deemed it far more impor-
tant to sustain the Administration at Wash
ington than to adhere faithfully to the Anti
Slavery resolves of its Party, which it knew
represented the public sentiment of the State,
This is the key to the proceedings of the
Legislature in regard to resolutions concern
ing the Nebraska Bill and in regard to the
election of United States Senator. The
Wings and Independent Democrats in that
body are minority. The Party in the ascend
ency is subservient to the Administration, and
refuses to array itself against its favorite meas
ure Individuals in it would be glad to unite
with the Wings and Independent Democrats
in legislative expression Of opinion against it,
but it would seem that thus far there has not
been enough Of them to accomplish this result.
On the other hand, the majority appears un-
willing to try the experiment Of positive reso-
lutions in favor Of this obnoxious measure of
the Administration.
Similar embarrassments complicated with
United States Senator. Mr.. Allen was UNDER
stood to be against the Douglas Nebraska
Bill Mr.. Medary wrote and printed q letter
in favor Of it and, soon after, his case being
hopeless, he was withdrawn as a candidate
The struggle between Messrs. Allen and Bart
lett both, rs we understand, opposed to the
BILL involved no principle, but neither would
yield. 1t became necessary to concentrate on
another candidate, and Mr.. Pugh was the ia
vored one. There as no evidence that any ques-
fion ,1as made during the eanvass concerning
his opinion on the Nebraska Bill; but there is
evidence that the Administration members of
the Legislature favorable to the Bill, knew
that he was a friend Of il, and that the Ad-
ministraton members hostile to it, had reason
10 believe This, but did not choose to raise any
question as to his position. Had they done
80, his views would not have been withheld,
and in this case they could not have vindicated
their support Of him before their constituents.
Mr.. Pugh concurs in the doctrine Of Mr..
Calhoun, that the Federal Government is
bound to protect as property, within its jurisdic.
ton, whatever is regarded as property in any Of
the States; and that under the Constitution,
and in virtue Of IL, Shareholders may carry
their slaves into any Territory Of the United
States He is in theory Pro Slavery man,
and his opinions are we'll known TO his party
in Ohio. We know, from unquestionable tes-
timony, that he is in favor Of the Nebraska
Bill Of Mr.. Douglas and that his position was
we'll understood by every member of the Ohio
Legislature who voted for him, we have not
the slightest doubt The two sections Of the
Administration party in that body did not
choose to question him formally, or raise an
issue on bis position. The Nebraska members
of course were Satisfied, for they could claim
his election, when accomplished, as q triumph,
while the Anti-Nebraska members would vim
dictate their Consistency, and justify them
selves to their constituents by asserting not
that they were ignorant Of Mr.. Pugh's opin-
ions, or that they we're imposed upon, but that
the question concerning his opinions did not
enter into the election.
Mr.. Pugh was elected, and the Ohio States
man claimed tho election as an endorsement
Of Douglas's Bill
The People will sustain as the Legislature