Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-02-11

Wisconsin. which prohibited Slavery, wore extend
d over Iowa but power was expressly given TO the
Territorial Legislature Of Iowa TO alter, amend or
epeal those Wisconsin laws. Some slaves were
carried there and held, and he believed the census
vi 1850 showed there were few in the State yet
lie said that Oregon might be referred 10 as ono
spot wherein Congressional legislation had pro-
bbited Slavery but he called attention TO the fact,
that years before the act Of Congress the the tenn
rorary Government established by the people. had
prohibited Slavery. The act Of Congress was
therefore nothing more than prohibiting the people
from doing that which they had long previously
declared they did not want to do. The adoption Of
that prohibition in the Oregon hill was therefore
nothing moro than a measure to manufacture some
thing TO promote tho political ends Of certain
party. When California was acquired every abo-
itionists in the country declared that unless Con-
grcs prohibited Slavery there, il would bo carried
to that State. The result shows differently. The
people left free, themselves prohibited IT, So in
Utah and New Mcxico those who favored the
principle Of letting the people do as they pleased
were denounced by the Abolitionists as Slavery
propagandsts, hut not yet had anything been
heard Of those people establishing Slavery. lie
knew Of no Territory now owned by the United
States where Slavery existed cxccptn this very Ter
rory Of Nebras where these confederates declare
it is prohibited by the Missouri Compromise and
where the Ordinance Of 'S7 is in force. There
was preacher in this city from Nebraska who q
few days since was before the Committee on Terri
tories. a member of the Committee asked If there
were any negroes there? He answered that there
were few held Ivy the Indians. lie was then asked
there were none held by white people. His reply
was, that there some held 10y white people, but
undcr very peculiar circumstances. lie said that
some years ago on Abolition missionary from Bos-
ton came into that country with his wife to reside:
that the country being new help was very scarce
and could not be procured and under these circum-
stances the missionary went down to Texas, paid
thousand dollars for negro, and brought him for
his own use. Laughter By this it would ap-
the difficulty Of obtaining help these Abolition
gentry and missionaries will buy and hold slaves
for their own use, taking peculiar pains too that
no one else shall use them. The preacher himself
il also turned out owned slaves there too, while
this might be the case. Now he did not believe
that when the country was settled more closely,
when labor could be procured Slavery would exist
10 that climate day. lie said he stood Ly the
Missouri Compromise as long as il was maintain
ed. When that was set aside in the manner he
had stated, he stood up for the principles Of the
tComprOmise Of 1850, and would continue to stand
By them. He denied the right Of the Aboitiouists
10 arraign him for being false TO sacred pledges.
They had succeeded in 1913 in rejecting and de-
ieating it, They had hunted down with lerOcity,
and as il for seeking the blood Of every man who
/ IN 1890 had voted for the Missouri Compromise.
| They had arraigned all who had supported OF
~sent out now to the people of tho United States
the false statements that the address was signed
by majority of the Ohio delegates, when in fact
! il had been signed by two Senators and few
Representatives in The House No Wings, nC
Democrats had signed it. Those few names ut
tached TO it were the pure, uuadutcrated rcprescn
tatiyes Of Aboitionism, Free Soilism. Niggcrisnl
in the Congress of the United States. Gentlemen
were willing to allow the people to cgislate on all
other subject but negroes. They were willing 10
allow them to lcgislate upon property, taxation
and all social relations, but would not trust them o
egslatc for negroes Did it require any higher de-
gree of intelligence to legslntc for negroes than for
white men? lie did not believe so. lie regretted
that in the course pursued by the Abolition con
icderaes in sending forth to the country their adj
dress, filed with misrepresentation and false state
ments, not only Of the bill but Of those who were
instrumental in forming it, had compelled him tC
use language in the Senate ola tone so severe a,
he ha5 done; but having now presented his views
lac would leave the bill to the Senate, and woulj
perhaps hereafter take another occasion Of reply
ing to any objections which might be made TO It
As he sat down, as well at various parts Of his
speech, there were evident manifestations Of ap
plauso in tho galleries and in the Obbics but they
were promptly checked by the officers.
Mr.. CHASE said that the Senator had spoken
/ lie had fired his gun. They had heard the report
they were now in the smoke but so far as he
could see no one had been hurt. They al survived
and he trusted would long survive such assaults AZ
I that Of the Senator. The Senator had charged
him and his friends with having prepared thci
address somewhere on the Sabbath. The Senator
had seized upon nm accidental error Of dating, IN,
upon it had made the charge that he and hi
friends had violated the Sabbath, for which da,
the Senator seemed TO have such peculiar respect
aud yet the Senator himself must have known tha
Il was an error Of date, Tor he had mentioned tn
fact that on Monday theaddres appeared in Tic Ma
Iyg.lV 60, sn;l hat; q into y
ed to produce an effect upon some tender-loote
Members of the Ohio Legislature, and therefore
had been represented by It's author that il wa
signed by II majority Of the Ohio Delegation
Here, too, the Senator was at fault The CORE,
ponding editor Of The Times had transmitted tn
address to his paper, and in his letter upon hi
own responsibility has stated that it bad bee
signed by the Ohio delegation, that editor had no
been informed by him, NJ. Chase nor could h
have been by any one who had signed the paper
lie Mr.. Chase was not responsible for what lette
writer's or any one stated. There was the Address
it bore the signatures of those who had signed il
lie had not sent it to Ohio. lle knew not how
got there, but had tolcgraphed to the Ohio papers
telling them not to publish it with any signature
but those actually signed TO II. How ii had beel
published he knew not. His colleague could 50.
Tit (the paper had been presented to him.
Mr.. WADE said he had never seen or read tn
document As it had been made known by tn
and thought that fit had been presented to him h
would have signed.
Other explanatory remarks by Mr.. Chase an
Mr.. Sumner we gave in our last
As We wish our readers to understand ts que.
ton most fully in its history well as its presen
aspects and probably results, VIC add a part of
letter from Mr. Chase to the meeting held in Ne'
. York on this question, Mr., Chase says,
WASHINGTON, Thursday Jan, 2G, 1851.
= GENTLEMAN: have to acknowledge The honor Z
your invitation to attend public meeting in Ne'
York, to protest against the repeal of the SLAYER
prohibition embodied in the Missouri act Of 1890
out Of all the territories acquired by treaty, G
annexed by act of Congress, since the org0nilato
Of our Federal Government, but two Free States
+ Iowa and California-havo been created; Will
out Of the same territory no less than five Slay
e Statos- Florida, Louisiana, Arkansas Missour