Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1854-05-19


Sisio. Now, what is the fact with respect the
compromises Of 1890 end 1860? Can they
not stand together? And if not, why knock
the one down hat is already down? 1t is
now four years since this inability to stand /
together took effect; and how do the two sets
of measures make out together at the end Of
This time? Perfectly we'll They are both
on their feet, standing bolt upright, and will
stand so forever, unless Congress knocks one
or the other of them down This is a fact
known to every body and admitted by the
bill itself; for il the first is inconsistent with
the second and unable to stand, why all this
trouble to put it down? Why trip up the |
heels Of the man already fat on his back on
the ground? Then comes another reason
that this compromise of 1929 is imperative |
and void.
! If SO, those who are against its operation
should be content 1t is in the very condi-
ton they wish it-useless, powerless, mac
tive, dead, and no bar to the progress of sla
very to the North. Void is vacant, empty
nothing Of it. Now, if the line SO deg. 80
min. is imperative and void, it is in the con-
dtion of fence pulled down and the rails
carried away, and the field left open for the
stock to enter. But the fence is not pulled
down yet. The line is not yet imperative
and vo d. 1t is an existing substantive line,
alive and operating, and op rating effectu'
ally to bar the progress of slavery to the
North, and will so continue to operate until
Congress shall stop its operation. Then comes
the final reason that there never was any
such line in the world; that it had no exist
ence from the beginning; and that it must
not be repealed By direct act, for that would
be to acknowledge its previous existence, and
TO nullify the constitutional argument; and
what is more terrible, involve the authors o.
the doctrine in an inconsistency of their own,
and thereby make them themselves inopera
tive and void. And this is the analysis of
reason for the Nebraska bill; that part of it
which is to get rid of the compromise Of 1920
untrue, contradictory, suicidal, and psepos.
ferrous. And why such farrago of nullilies,
incongruiIies, and inconsistencies? Purely
and simply TO throw upon others, upon the
; Congress of 1850 and the innocent Constiu.
ton, the blame of what the bill itself is do
ing; the blame of destroying the compro-
; mise of 1920, and with it destroying all con.
; tidence between the North and the South,
> and arrayng one-half the Union against the
: other in deadly hostility. 1t is to be able tc
: throw blame upon the innocent that this far,
+ + rago is served up to US.
= And what is all this hotch .potch for? 1t
is to establish principle, they say-the
; principle Of non Intervention of squatter SOW
., ereignty Sir there is no such principle
: The Territories are the children Of the States
. They are minors under twenty one years oi
Il age; and it is the business of the States
" through their delegation in Congress to take
:, care of these minors until they are Of age
; until they are ripe for State Government and
q admit them to an equality with their fathers
This is the law, and the sense OF The case
!. and has been 81 acknowledged since the first
- ordinance of 1884, by all authorities, FEEDER
al and State, legislative, judicial and exccu
, tive. The States in Congress are the GUAR
. dians Of the Territories, and are bound t
= exercise the guardianship; and cannot abdi
cate it without breach of trust and dere
- liction of duty Territorial sovereignty in
monstrosity, born of timidity and ambition
e hatched into existence in the hot incubation
;, Of Presidentialcanvass, and revolving to th,
Il beholders when first presented. Well do
e remember that day when it was first show
. in the Senate. Mark Anhony did not bette
- ltulFLlDCl tIdl uhI WuVH NeCSHl III St put vi
~ that mantle through which he was after
~ wards pierced with three and twenty "enviou
,f stabo" 1t was in the Senate in l84S, AM
WAS received as noBsenee, as the essence @
- nonsence, as the quint essense of nonsense
as the five times distilled essence of potica
10 nonsensincalIy. Why, sir, the Territory il
-, self is the property of the States, and the
:, do what thev paese with it; permit il to b
!, settled or not, as they please; cut it up b
~ lines, as they please; sell it or give it away
=, as they please; chase white people from it, a
they please. After this farrago, this oil
"a podridoe comes little stump speech, injec
4 ed in the belly of the bill, and which mus
~ have prodigious effect when recited in tn
~ prairies, and out towards the frontiers, and u
~ tow ards the heads of the creeks. will rea
=, it, and hope without faligung the House
" w for it is beth brief and beautiful, and run
!, thus:
~ 1T being the true intent and meaning {
~ this act not to legislate slavery into any Stat
of or Territory, nor to exclude it therefrom; br
to leave the people thereof perfectly free
he form and regulate their domestic institution
ch in their own way, subject only to the cons,
re tuition Of the United States"
If This is the speech, and pretty little thin
ly itself, and very proper to be spoken from
IL stump in the prairie 1t has intent. and
IS true latent, which is neither to legislate sl'
C. very into or out of any State or Territory
of Then why egislate at al? Why all this di'
ID turbance If no effect is produced, and thing
n 10 remain just as they were? Let we
e. enough alone was the old doctrine; to max
% well enough still better is the dnctriue +
u progress and that in spite of the Italian ep
taph, which says, 81 was well and would b
as better, took physc and here am" But III
= States must be greatly delighted at the pc
r. lileness and forbearance Of this bill. Il put
~ States and Territories upon precise equalit
TO with respect TO the power of Congress owe
ct them. Congress does not mean to put slave
ny ry in or ont of any State or Territory. I
be all that polite abnegation have to say tina
c. in respect Of the States, it is the saperogatio