Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-04-21
THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER-
HOW STANDS 1T ON THE RE-
CORD.

The I4teiiigencer places its opposition to the
Nebraska bill upon the isolated point that it
is breach of faith-that the Missouri compro
mise, being compromise, is sacred, and that
any repeal, alteration, or abroeation is an I'M
justifable breach Of faith, calling for the re-
lentless opposition of all honest and true men.
This is the position taken by the Lateiiigencer.
How does the L,telligencer fare, when brought
TO the line and plummet of its own standard?
Why did the Iateliigeacer as actively and
more solemn and sacred compromise of 1882
as it now opposes any alteration Of the Mis-
souri, compromise?
In the case of the Missouri compromise,
quiescence /; to the. more imposing compromise
of 1882, more than three times that number
gave solemn assurance for the north that it
should be respected. The dangers attendant
arthe Missouri crisis were not of character
to induce Henry Clay to offer compromise;
but in 1882, the inevitable alternative of disso-
luton or of civil war left no other refuge.
Upon what principle, then, did the lnteli-
gencer use its utmost ability snd power to abb
rogate this most solemn and formal of all COM
promises, and resist as iniquitous the altering
or repeating of this comparatively Insignificant
one? 1t is true, the Intelligencer takes the
ground that breach of faith, whether in a
greater or lesser matter, is the essence of the
wrong, and that great compromise and les.
ser one are equally binding on good faith and
honor that it will not, therefore, look beyond
this insuperable objection, even to consider the
question of expediency, or even of right, if in
conflict with a compromise.
With these views or sentiments, the pro-
priety Of which we are not disposed to contro
vert, we have the Mtelhgencer on record, pas
sim during the discussion,1 advocating, with
its utmost warmth and ability, the very detest
able breach of faith it now charges upon 9TH
ers, and so regulating its efforts as to- break
faith on the compromise of 1882, just at the
moment it was to prove beneficial to the south.
Is there any other solution to these incon-
ssteCcies, than that in the one case, its incli-
nations prompted an abrogation, and in the
other kindred inclination induces its oppos
| ton; the polar star in both cases seeming to
be hostility to the south? This strong motive
power makes faith good or bad, as may be the
tendency of measure.
five err not in the signs Of the times, an
effort is on foot to make the Lntelligencer the
cement by which the northern whig and aboli-
ton parties are to be rendered cohesive for
the coming contest; the New York Tribune
having already made overtures to have its
tag-rag and bob-tail regiments to stand in the
whig ranks, under any name they may choose
to give them, letting them have only
chance at plumber and power. 1t is even SO
by their right names and no offence will be
taken, only let them have a chance, the motley
group, out. Heroding Falstaff. See them ranged
under their proud banners, Fourrierism, inf
deity, socialism, negroism, Greeeyism, 1.-THE
Protaan name, ct id omne genus, ravenous from
long-fasting, and now offering themselves as
hungry ours to the wing party Of the north, to
hunt down the friends of the Constitution
To carry out this insane crusade, the h,telli-
geacer, from its novel edition of definitions,
helps them to key note: When is breach
Of faith not breach of faith? When the north
is sure to gain and the south to lose. When
is a breach of faith breach of faith? When !
the south might gain and the north might lose. |
We regret the mode in which the IateUi. !
gencer carries on the war against the Nebraska
bill-viz., that Of giving as the reason its
scruples on the plea of faith, which cannot ex-
list in this case, without convincing them of a
want of scruples when scruples were more just
Is required.