Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-04-15
Communications.
PLIGHTED FAITH.


! What a summons to universal action was the
! introduction into Congress of Douglas Nebraska
BILL 1t has furnished peg for every body that
could speak, to hang a speech upon. Wherever
go find the people discussing it, and every paper
| take up is filed with reports of anti-Nebraska
meetings. II is matter for congratulation that
something has been found sufficiently powerful to
move not only the common people, but the dry
bones Of conservatism, that have been worshpped
as sanity relics. 1t does, however, seem strange
that men who preached submission te the fugitive
law Of 1850, should possess enough moral stamina
to be led to oppose the extension of slave territory
in 1854, and only be accounted for by the fact
that the world docs But it is to he feared it
is not so much the iniquity of the Nebraska bill
that has so shocked the moral sensibilities of the
North, the fact that its introduction and adop-
ton is a violation Of plighted fath-not so much
that an infamous thing is proposed, as the rcmem-
brance that slavery and its aDettors lied, when in
1850 they promised to keep quiet.
! A VIOLATION OF rLionTED FAITH is the change
upon which many Of the opponents Of the bill
ring their opposition and they think il easier to
prove his than to show that the opening of Ne
braska to slave occupation is worse than fifty other
things they freely consented to- and the wisdom
Of their conclusion is worthy of all admiration !!
The Whig platform of 1862 declares, 1--WE depre-
cate all further agitation Of the question thus
settled, (by the compromise of 1867 as dangerous
to our peace, and will discountenance all efforts 10
continue or renew such agitation, whenever, wher.
ever, or however made" The other Baltimore
platform s,to say the least equally explicit for il
AYERS, " The Democratic party will resist all at
tempts at renewing, in Congress or out Of 1t, the
agitation Of the slavery question, under whatever
shape or color the attempt may be made" But of
what binding force have these pledges bceng OF
what worth were they to those who relied upon
thcm' They were just as binding as political
pledges and declarations generally are; worth.
perhaps-though that is questionable-as much as
the paper upon which they were written. DOUGLAS
knep that the introduction Of tho Nebraska bin
into Congress would not only renew the agitation
oil the slavery question ia that body, but out of il
and the supporters Of the bill both in Congress- and
out OF Congress-whether Democrats or Whigs-I
were aware Of the same but when the interests of
the slave power could be advanced by such viola
tion of plghted faith, and their own political pros
poets made brighter, they hesitated not to break
every promise they had made to the people not to
agitate the question. They probably thought that
the more odious violation OF plighted faith con-
emplated by the bill itself in the repeal of the Mis-
souricompromise, would entirely into the shade
OF orgetuness. their personal offences of the same
character If Douglas and his supporters were un.
willingt keep SILENT as they promised to do, why
did they not first confess they did weakly or wick
cdly in giving such n pledge, take it back, and
return to the people every consideration they OBJ
tained in exchange for it, and then agitatc TO their
hearts content? The error is not so much in gv.
ing wrong pledge, believing it to be right, as to
suffer that pledge 10 stand after seeing it to be
wrong and while refusing to fulfill it, retaining all
you got in exchange for it.
1t is no wonder that so much fault is found with
those who seek to repeal the Missouri compromise.
and by so doing, cheat the North out of the nav il
got for conscnng to it for it is not proposed that
by its repeal Missouri shall again become terri
tory, and that vote upon her admission into the
Union as slaveholding State should again be
taken' The proposition to repeal is infamous, and
1t is regarded the more So because the bargain has
stood, with its constitutionaty unquestioned for
more than thirty years. II tcould be a curious and
interesting problem, TO decide Just ho much pyo(s
sed dJoldonsts hare themselves done 10 Iyino abo,i
such state Of things. OF course, the Disunionists
are not here referred to, for they have always in
sisted upon the duty of every opponent of slavery
to refuse giving any pledge to support the instu-
hon' or having already given it, that they shall at
once repudate it, and by Withdrawing from the
government, refuse to receive the political consid
Grafton the South gave in exchange for it. But
there are many professed abolonists who call such
a course "a do-nothing policy" and who continue
to pledge Themselves under the constitution to crush
the insurgent slave and to give back the Hyne fu-
gitive, and then turn round and declare then cM
not do either of these things and did not intend 10
when they the promise, which all know would
not have been made if they could have secured the
political franchise without doing go. Should not
the compromises Of the constitution bc considered
fully as binding as the Missouri Compromise Is
1t not as great a violation Of faith to refuse
redeem the pledges written out in the Con-
stution sIxrr-FIvE years ago, as those in the Mis-
souri, bill of hirtyJour years since If slavery is
admitted into Nebraska, and the Missouri Compro.
mise thereby violated will it not he done by apnv.
ing to that compromise. the principles upon which
many Of the Free Sellers base there justification Of
their refusual to carry out the compromises of the
Constitution while remaining members of the GOV
ernment? How far the preaching of such doctrine
by them has led to the present posture of affairs.
Judge ye' B.S.J.
REPLY TO MIR. BARRY {