The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-06-25

truth in either aspect of the statement He at his post
and in the discharge Of his duties and likely to remain
so far we have any information. =
AN APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE.
"From unjust and wrongful in ITSELF and aught
with consequences fearful, appeal to the people. We
appeal in sectional spirit We appeal equally to the
North and South the free States and to the slave
holding States themselves '-Ant- Nebraska Address
We would be false to professions democrats, and
recreant in dscharging the obligations imposed by POI
ston as an organ Of the democratic party if hesated
TO accept the issue thus formally rendered When Mr.
Douglas on the 4th of January reported his original BILL
the leading aboitionsts in Congress appealed ito the
people Of the United States to nterpose their power to
rest the passage Of the bill We met the issue then with
promptness and earnestness In the spirit and with
like detcrmin alton the popular judgment in ia
vor of the complained Of join issue with the appel
lants proposition repeal the Kansas and Nebraska
act.
The feature in the address of the appellants to which we
will direct attention is that in which it is sought to show
that the proposition to repeal the Missouri restriction
violation of the pledge contained in the Baltimore plat
form and in the inaugural address of President Pierce to
resist any further agitation Of the slavery question: and to
abide ny the Compromise Of 1850. After quoting from
these documents s evidence that such pledge made
the appellants proceed IS follows:
Under these circumstances, the proposition to repeal the
Missouri Compromise suddenly and unexpectedly made
by the Committee Territories which, only days
before had affirmed the anctiy of the Missouri Compromise
declared the end Of agitation in the following explicit and
spmistakable language
discussion Of those conrovered questions They
involve the grave ues which produce the agitation
the sectional strife and the fearful struggle of 1850. As
Congress deemed wise and prudent reiran from de-
Gliding the matters controversy tier either by affirming
he
true intent the constitution, and the the proteo
ton afforded BY TO slave property in the Territories
parture from the pursued that memorable
either by affirming rpsaag the eighth section Of the
constitution in respect to the legal points in dispute
1t is remarkable that the authors of this address should
ventare 10 charge that the Senate Committee Terri
tories in their lspprt aaGfrmedhe sanety Of the Missouri
Comromis and in the NEXT breath furnish the proof that
the charge untrue by quoting ron the report Instead
of affirming the saacy Of that Compromise the committee
decline eher affirming repeating the eighth section Of
the Missouri actn They deemed 1t sufficient in the then
state of things, TO apply in express the principle of
congressional nonntervenon established by the Compro-
mise OF 1850 the Territory Of Nebraska and leave the
question whether that constituted implied repeal OF the
Missouri 10 the decision of the This
adopted because Of the sancttyH Of that act but be-
similar had been pursued in the legislation
of 1850 in regard to the Mexican restriction Since the
passage CT The Compromise of 1850 doubt has been
tertained the abrogaton by that Of the Mexican
restriction Nor do suppose tia. tia Senate committee
entertained any doubt tina, the incorporation into the
braskn bill of the principle of non-ntervcnton by
gress would certainly abrogate the Missouri restriction in
the Nebraska Territory
But we shall content ourselves with exposing this
palpabe misrepresentation of the views of the Senate
committee; but win cali those appellants themselves
10 the stand and convict them by their own dec
larations We have no hesitation in assuming that
the aboonsts who addressed the people the 10th
January 1854 against the passage of the Nebraska bill
part and parcel OF the appellants who tender the
issue Of repeal When that address issued the
10th Of January wish IL to bc borne IN mind that the
original bill reported by the Senate committee pend
ing and that the appeal the country against that
bill We would ask the reader, also to observe that the
present appellants say that the proposition repeal the
Missouri Compromise was Suddenly and Unexpectedly
made by the committee which, only ten days be-
fore had Aligned its sauctty The only idea that could
born intended to be conveyed by this declaration
the BILL srst reported by the committee did
repeal the Missouri Compromise bn the contrary; a
fredn sapoy therefore the proposition ten days after
wards by the committee resist amendment ex
pressly repeating the Missouri Compromise 4suddniy
and unexpectedly made" But unfortunately for the
dor and the consistency appellants the address of their
coappellants Messrs Chase, Sumner, Giddings, Wade
0errt Smith, and Dewitt dated and issued the 10th
Of January 1854 before Senator Douglas propoecd the
amendment which expressly repeats the Missouri Compr
mise Appealed 10 the people of the United States to pre-
vent the passage of the bill and upon the distinct
allegation that II IA gross violation OF sacred
pledge and that the bin deliberately purposes 10 repeal
this prohibition lhc Missouri restricton by implication
or directly" But place this matter beyond cav we
quote the whole sentence, follows:
II 10 strange and ominous fact well calculated to
AIKEN the worst apprehensons and the fearful fore
bodngs Of future caamities, that ds,bero,ls pro-
pos~d 10 repeal tss proAb''o~, ~ mpnson drscaybe
atsr certainly the msner wsysnd As. 70 s5~eys he
poet AND allow slavery In all the yet territory
This was the construction Of the original bill OF
Senator Douglas by Messrs Chase, sumner, Giddings