Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1854-02-18

SATURDAY MORNINGS. FEBY Is. 1884.
sonsass.l ssntinasnt and .soatheIn oEoullds

lie sentiment. tHtft Is an dtHeri ltSAttSA 1tts
feeling in the slaveheding States upon the mai
question involved in the Nebraska debate. Tia
question. as we intmated yesterday. is the ap
plieation TO all the States and Territories which
have heretofore, or yet may come into the con
federation and jurisdiction Of the Union, ct th'
Fundamental principle conceded IN the eompro
mise of 1850. and confirmed by the two grea
party conventions which met in Baltimore two
years later--ihe principle of equality in dignity,
privileges and power, and the sacred right OF
self government in all matters of local aud do
nestle character.
The question, as we regard it, Is moi simply
whether the people Of Nebraska shall own slaves
or not-that is but an incident Of tho higher and
broader proposition. the real question: whether
they and all others similarly situated sha stand
equal under the constitution with all who have
hitherto organized States and become citizens Of
the Republic.
That question. unhappily and wrongfally set at
rest by desire to relieve the country from the
perilous exigcncy Of Iss0, has been again raised,
not by the South, with no shadow OF bad faith on
her part. but a consequence of the Legislation
of 1850, and by gentleman representing
Northern, mons laveholding State. Under such
circumstances the South has a right to speak
and she is speaking, calmly, unitediy and re-
--i-.~a,. W. .-.e. ..-' sinister and magn
thought of party advantage will creep IN, to dis
solve the unbroken concord now exhibited, and
to paralyze or pervert the strength which should
be welded with one will, for common purpose
Yesterday we gave our views of the general
question. 1t IS well, in the consideration of all
important subjects that full and accurate
knowledge of all the circumstances bearing upon
it and the reasons upon which it Is based should
be had in the beginning. a late letter from
Senator Dixon, addressed to the editors Of the
Louisville Times, explains clearly and in detail
the necessity FOR the provision of the proposed
bill which abrogates the Missouri Compromise
We transcribe it for the information of those
who may not have had leisure to read the speeches
the subject
1t will be recollected thut the whole of the ter
ritory embraced within the provisions of the bill
lies north Of 81 deg 80 min. north latitude, and
that slavery in it is forever prohibited by the
eighth section of the act commonly known ms the
Missouri Compromise Act, which declares ''thht
in all that Territory coded by France 10 the L.
States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies
north of 81 deg 30 min, north latitude, slavery
and involuntary seryitnde, otherwise than in the
have been duly convicted, shall be forever pro.
hibited."
1t will at once be perceived that, 50 long this
act remains in force, slavery must be excluded
from the proposed Territories. The bill,
ported by the committee, repeats 1t to the extent
only of allowing the people living within the linn
its of such States may be formed out of said
Territories TO have not TO have slavery, a.
their constitution may prescribe et the time of
their admission and also of extending To the
people living within the limits of said Territories
before organized into States the like privilege
From the provisions in the bill above alluded to
it will appear manifest that, unless the eighth
). section of the Missouri Compromise Act Is re
pealed, no citizen living within slayeholding
State can emigrate to said Territories and carry
along with him his slaves until after the people
living within the same shall have met together
and through urir appropriate Representatives
decided whether slavery shall exist or mol. Tn
der this state of the case, no one could doubt that
the decision would be against the shareholders;
for as the law up to this point would exclude all
shareholders from the Territories whilst il would
admit abolitionsts, Freesolers, foreigners, and
all others opposed TO slavery, the light to d, eide
the question would be confined alone to the OPP
ponents of slavery, and those opposed to its
coming into the Territories.
That this would render the provisions of the
bill as reported by the committee wholly inopera-
tive, so far they were intended Ia benefit the
people living within the limits of the slayehold-
ing States, there be shadow Of doubt, and
amount 10 the leaving of the whole question: SO
far as any practical result is 10 be attained, pre-
cisey as il now exists under the provisions OF
the Missouri Compromise Act. 1t promises the
substance but secures only the shadow To the
people of the South. 1T keeps the word of promise
to the ear and breaks it to the hope whilst ali
that is real and valuable is left to be appropra-
ted by the people living within the limits of the
States in which no slavery exists. The object
tons taken by me 10 the bin were entertained
by every Southern man. SO far as ! can learn
in both Houses of Congress, whether Wing on
Democrat. and TO remove these offered the n
mendment which seems to have given SO muol
offence 10 YOU and which, as | have before said
was subsequently in substance adopted by th1
committee, and Incorporated into the bill
That amendment repeats much of the Mis-
sour Compromise act as 'ioreyer prohibits slave
ry forth of 80 deg. 80 mn north latitude" 10y
declaring '.that it shall not he so construed as t,
apply to the Territory contemplated by this act
or TO any other Territory of the United States
but that the citizens of the several States or Ter
ritories shall be at liberty to take and hold thei
slaves within any of the Territories of the unite'
States or of the States to be formed therefrom
as If the said act entitled aforesaid and approx
ed as aforesaid had never been passed. This "A
mendment does nothing more nor less than repeo
the Missouri Compromise act so far as slavery i
concerned, and leaves the whole question, as T.
the right of the citizens of the sayehoding State
to carry their slaves into said territory, just rs
would have been If the restriction contained il
the Missouri Compromise act had never been ere
ated by Congress; or in other Words it declare
Congressional non-interference with the subiec