The statesman & blue hen's chicken. (Wilmington [Del.) 1854-1855, 1854-11-11

N-~'Nf - 50 fs'' l'tHf' - N-fN '~NA"sf~~'
Why, the country will ask in amaze
ment, 'rhy, upon his own principles of
reasoning or apology, did not Mr.. c. re-
fuse to disturb the act oflS20g
We are now prepared to view, in a
proper frame of mind, the interesting en-
quiry in Mr.. C's. Delaware city address,
Scan it now be expected Of me that |
should make mysrf aparty to such con
trovesy as that which RACES, &c"
He deprecateS any attempt to drag him
into such controversy Innocent man
lie is outside of the quarrel "He did
not vote for the repeal of the line in the
Nebraska act !" An intelligent public
will know with what measure Of contempt
to receive this declaration.
We have said we believed Mr.. q. was
in great degree responsible for the re-
peal of the act of 1920, and consequently
for the danger in which the country is
now involved. We will give our reasons.
Mr.. G. was distinguished Senator, of
national reputation, of political conse-
quence, from Slave State. The South
wanted the countenance of able men to
stand up fur the right Hunt, Bell, and
the few other Southern Gentlemen, who
rose above the level of the mere politician
to the full attitude of patriots, needed
com-patriots, apathy existed at the South.
Nothing but the fact that Abolitionists
and Free-Soilers sided with the Anti-Re-
pcalcrs, could have secured a Southern
vote for Repeal Every mail brings evil
dencc of the chagrin and modification
they feel at the South, at the position in
which they have been placed by their
delegations in Congress. They are begin
ming TO taste some Of MIR C's "bitter
fruits" In our Judgment, the political
weight of Mr. c. would have determined
a nicely balanced contest. His rery po-
saioa, as the Representative of Slave
State, would have brought others to his
side. His political and personal friends
confidently expected this result. The
country looked on with interest, and
turned aside in disgust and disappoint-
ment at Senator Badgers announcement
Have we gone too far in saying, Mr. c..
could have defeated the repeal of the
Compromise of 1920?
We will now view Mr.. Clayton as the
leader Of a new party, to save the Union
f-fs' tsfsffocts ofslavery agitation, Moral
influence througlgsttie country, especial
ly at the Month, is requisite for such a
position. Had he sustained the compro-
mise Of 1920, he would have had their
Influence. He would have been hailed
throughout the Middle, Northern, and
Western States, as true Statesman and
Patriot, and not denounced as a Dema-
gogue and Panderer to the spirit of Slavery
extension. At the South, the same sound
public opinion, which has sustained Hunt,
Bell, and the other gentlemen who voted
to sustain the act of 1920, would have
sustained him. In his own State, he
would not have forfeited the respect Of
his friends He has missed the chance Of
making himself a character better than
any prospect of political success, and
Numbered on the step which took away
his only hope of the Presidency.
He advocated the repeal against the
wishes of his State, expressed through
Legislative Resolutions. He had nj
reason to suppose any change had taker
place in public opinion since lS47 yet
with an inconsistency which belongs t.
the weakness of his position, he asks il
his speech of March LIST and I'd 1854
" But can a Senator whose constituents
hold slaves be expected to resist and
as'a ,nansmr. ,Ina - nsg Co,,ld ono =,
~ ;..,;e,J L.. H. oons,;.,o,,a l.,
roe,s;nn;,gn
- NV.
s'' '' vu' sac W.
n'1 IT'S r,. -is go ',is -''aO,",,Ol'
raoonta,;yes IN c,ona,svs ,r,. hsrah,, ~
ouos,o1 "a voto !, d. ,,,,,,.,a,,;a,. !,
!, :, +,