New-York daily tribune., 1854-07-10


severe siege as in 1919.
CAY WE RE-EsTAELIsH THE MISSOURI LINE.
We have ayowed our wish that erery Member of the
present Congress sincerely and heartily adverse TO the
repudation Of the Missouri Compromise should be
reelected provided only that he can and will consent
to serve through the next Congress. We desire this,
because we believe an old Member can be more eff
cient and influential than new one, and because we
consider the question involved in the organization of
Nebraska and Kansas paramount to all others. There
are doubtessindiyiduals among the Members we thus
indicate Ourwisb 10 see reelected who might be super
seded ly men equally sound the Nebraska question
and more acceptable on other grounds; but regarded
as class, should like to see every thorough oppo
nent of the Douglas Inquity returned matter what
are Lis views on other questions.
But we have already explained that we do not re-
gard mere vote against the Douglas bill in the past
as sufficient evidence of sOundness for the future.
We know that there were who voted against that
bill yet gave its supporters to understand that they
desired its passage and though acting under the con.
strant of general hostility to the measure among
their constituents would yet manage to do it as lit
tie harm as possible. We know that Pierce, Doug
las & Co. operated throughout with perfect knowl-
edge that many of the guns osentatiousy pointed
against them were of the Quaker order, and would
do them more harm by the report than by any bullet
they contained. OF course, don't want any of this
sort reelected. Better open contenners of Right
eousDess and Freedom than they.
One mode Of detecting those who never meant any
thing by their opposition to Douglas but to keep fair
weather with their constituents is by listening to
their utterances for the future. lie who tells you
that be was earnestly against the main feature of the
Nebraska BILL but, now that it is passed, he deems
further opposition useless and mischevous does not
tell you the truth. He never heartily against
the measure or he would not be disposed to give it mp
So Party or personal considerations may have in
duced him to chime in with the popular sentiment of
his locality or section, but his heart not in the
matter. Thus The Buffalo Commercial talks exactly
we expected it would in this emergency-as follows:
"Couceding, for the sake of argument that all the OBJ
ces to Northern unaumity may be surmOunted,
still prepared 10 show that the whole organization would
lie ute futile. During the existence of the present Ai
misration would most obviously be unless could
command two-thirds majority in both Houses of Con
grss and extract the sting nom the Executive Veto
But there thirty southern Senators, IN body which
consists Of only sxytwo members; and these thirty Sem
stors would, to man, under the circumstances have
supposed oppose the repeal The expectation of the
peal of the Nebraska act during the present Admnrl
tion if body simple enough 10 entertain IT. is obv
ously Idle. Let thenit will be perceived that
disposed to make very liberal concessions for the
sake Of argumenet us suppose that in the next Pre
DENTAL election the sectional organization should carry
every Northern State and elect their favore candidate
We will suppose, too, that every member of the lower
HOUSE from every onSay ehoding State is IN unncng
advocate of repeal. We DO not know whether any Abol
tionist quite so much of dreamer to expect all this
bs all this would not accomplish the object The
roasen simple but conclusive. The Senatorial
stephen A. Douglas does not expire till the year 1859; he
the father OF the measure You seek TO repeal aud has
staked his political salvation on IT. 1t ia certain he will
vote with You, but with the South. 1t requires bat
Northern vote TO make tie in TIE Senate and prevent
the passage OF any act that resisted by all the Southern
Senators. perfectly certain therefore that up 10 the
wear 1859 the Nebraska act viii stand unrepealed
"To men of sense there can be no more conclusive
cumtnt against any enterprise than its demonstrated i'm
possibility. We have already iniimaed opinion that
ii the repeal of tie Nebraska act feasible it woui
be worth considerable eNertion 10 aocompsht IT, Its early
oleal would be wholesome rebuke 10 the Southern bad
faith and Northern tr, achery by which it passed Bat
1t is oly-nSy i is madness to let loose the storm for
the mere malevoen pleasure Of gazing the wild up
rear that accompanies IL for the fendsh delight which
tarbpien, and malignant spirits will feel they witness
the convuons in which has its birth and the desoaon
which marks its path With the absolute certainty before
US that the Nebraska act cannot be repealed wae repeal
would be OF any avail we deem il our duty, aud the duty
oi every man whosets any value on the public tranquility
TO withstand the insane sectional project that is ag
taed and to front with earnest resoute and nex-
ibe opposition.
Now it is very clear that House composed of
ssoh opponents of the Nebraska Inquity as our Buff
fso coemporary will never enforce the restoration of
the Missouri line, whether in lS56 or at any other
time. But let majority be chosen to the next House
Of men who really mean that the Nebraska wrong
shall be repaired and it R be before the close Of lis
first session. Let the House just stix to the Def
cheney bill, then TO the Civil and Diplomatic Appro
priaton bill, and to three or four more such if nece:
sary, proyso repeating much Of the Nebraska.
Kansas bill affects the Missouri Restriction. and
declaring that Restriction reestabhed and the work
is done. There may be kicking at first, but let
the House evince quiet cool determination, and the
bill will pass, in spite Of half dozen Dougla.es
representing the Free States. The Federal Office
holders who have done most of the eectioneerng for
the Iniquity will be lobbying on the other side when