The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-19

The opponents OF tue Nebraska bill at the North as
sign different positions the South Some represent the
southern people united and determined in support OF
the measure, and they deduee from this fact the infer
ence thai the bill must be peculiarly favorable TO south
institutions Others refer TO the fact that but few
public meetings have been held in The South evidence
that the southern people Indifferent TO the ques
ion, and hence it is inferred that the passage OF the bill
Is not demanded by public sentiment Neither class OF
opponents represents the position OF the South correctly
There is nothing in the bill which renders the introduce
ton OF slavery into Nebraska probable Hence, ii the
southern people desired such result from the leesla
uon OF Congress, (Which they do not) they could find
no reason for becoming excited the sabect They
ask no interference By Congress for the establishment of
slavery anywhere. They for the bill OF Judge
Douglas because they want final settlement, OF the
question, and because they see in i, the assertion
OF principle which promises the only hope OF final
Element. They do sustain the bill as pro slavery.
but as q non-nleIvention measure. They have conf
dence in the fidelity and wisdom OF their and
representatives in Congress, and therefore calm and
composed whilst the question is pending. They are not
disposed to revive mooled questions the powers Of
the inhabitants OF Territory under the constitution bu,
willing TO take the bill and hope for the restoration
tia TO The stability of the Union The Charleston Mer-
curry is generally regarded entertaining extreme views
the slavery question. Its position. therefore, may be
probably examined by those the North who desire to
act understandingy the subject That journal makes
the following calm and conciaiory remarks on the bill
as it passed the Senate
"Our position took define, as thought
beyond the possibility Of doubt We have supported the
bill In moderate way, and regret that
support The bill, in OF those explanatory clauses add
ed % IL for the sake Of cearness declares that is the in
tent OF its provisions to impose the territorial egsl
other than such spring the cons
tuition OF the United States This is the substance The
constitution is expressly recognised the arbiler the ex
oil the powers conferred and we do not believe
squatier sovereignty consistent with constitution
do not therefore, admit that il is sanctioned by the bill
Gen Cas- believes il is constitutional and he therefore
the triumph OF his doctrine in the BILL because 1t does
not limit the exercise of the powers granted except by the
constitution
"We in this any good cause for south
running aioui of each other. What should we
gain by defeating this bill We should simply defend and
perpctuate the existence OF OF
slavery the whole territory Missouri and the
Rocky mountains Even if should gain nothing by
passing the bill lose nothing The territory is un-
der inlerdie the very happen is that
dict and that the of the United States may decide
that they have the right TO do But they may
to do it. and II they should, may be- sustained by
the Itis bad logic conclude that worst con-
cevabe consequence Is the to be looked for
OF course Our planters continue to plough their fields and
plant their seed Notwithstanding the possibility that the
whole crop may perish unharyesed Let us hope'n