New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-10-23

VA ALREADY iGed-that tle laws OF God haa
secured them forever to Free Labor, and thst sne
reduction OF the assumed limits of Texas so as to
secure all Of New Mexico 70 Freedom. with the
admission Of California expressly 81 Free State
were liberal equivalents for waiver OF the Fro
yiso as to New Mexico and Utah, where it could
have but a nominal existence. The movement oil
Dixon, promptly denounced By The Union and
The manifest hesitation and reluctance Of Douglas,
lat length more fully explained BY the revelations
Of AtcLson, to repeal the Missouri Restriction.
all unite to prove beyond question that the pro-
visions respecting Slavery inserted in Che Ne
brasks bill were regarded by their authors %
constituting an experiment novel In character
and dubious IS to its reception BY the People.
Well: the experiment has failed-is there any
remaining doubt on that point Wisely or u1-
wisely the People have put their Veto on the
Douglas principle and policy. Pennsylvania,
Ohio. Indiana, following Rhode Island COnnect-
cut Iowa and Vermont, assert their right TO be
heard on the question of Slavery or No Slavery 10
the common territories Of the American Union
assert that this question concerns the whole
not merely the few hundreds or thousands who
happen first TO get foo.hold on particular ter
ritory. There is no longer doubt that the next
House will show strong majority opposed to the
Douglas principle affirmed By its predecessor.
And. in view of this fact, The Journal Of Com
meres and other Cotton oracles are urging the
Senate to resist the popular impulse and defeat
the proposed modification of the Nebraska act.
Is this right Is it polticl What can it eff
feet The present Congress has undertaken to
vote away or sbdicste, Lot its own right merely
but the right of all future Congresses, and of the
People Represented therein, to exclude Slavery
from the Federal Territories. But the People
and their next Congress repudiate this action OF
Douglas & Co., say ing that they rN exercise the
power which the Nebraska act abjures. This pop
ular resolve reduces the Pro-Slavery provisions
of the Nebraska bill to waste-psper. VI what
avail is it that dead Congress has said that the
People shall not exercise certain power when
the People themselves cay that they will
We'll: suppose our House of Lords In whicn
Delaware and Florida balance New.iOrk aud
Ohio, shall refuse to modify the Douglas bill 10
accordance with public sentiment-what iollo"S
Suppose the House shall see fit to append to the
Civil and Diplomatic Appropriation BILL at the
end Of the appropriation for the payment OF the
Executive and Judiciary of Kansas,
"Proridcd, That so much Of the act organizing the
Tarritories of Kansas and Nebraska as purports to
repeal the provision of law commonly knoS as ths
Missouri Restriction be and the same hereby Is re-
peeled"
What then! The Senate strikes it out aud
the House ren5ertst; AM this process is repeated
ever 80 many times-how them 1.-THE office
holders can DO without their pay for year or
two, can't ne outsiders endure their privation
with tolerabe philosophy Cannot those who
represent and act for great majority Of the
People hold out as long as the representatives of
by gone controversies and rotten boroughs' II
the question goes over the power of the Peoples
House TO refuse admission to any new Slave State
remains intact. Let us show that there is q
North aud that the Peoples will must be obeyed.