The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-01-29

. view to pacify the North temporarily, and
obviously pregnant with future discord and
strife. All these thoughts must have
rushed through Mr.. Clay's mind as he carried
his compromise through the House. But the
voice Of ambition was too loud for the murmurs
Of conscience to make themselves heard.
Prompted by the secret. motives we have men
toned, and pressed with theinfuence and Ia
lent Of all the Southern leaders on House al
ready weary of strife, and caring little about
strict constitutional principle SO long as the
battle were drawn, the Missouri compromise,
in an evil hour, became law Of the land.
1t bought us twenty-six years Of comparative
peace. Not solid, beneficial peace, but
hollow truce, resting on rotten basis, and only
serving to foment desire for further war.
Soon enough the South discovered their fatal
error and the dangerous departure from the
constitution involved in the pledge they had
given. Too soon the North awoke to the i'm
portance Of the advantage they had gained,
and resolved to follow up their encroach-
ments on the rights Of the South with
renewed yigor. Hence angry alterations
abOlrtionism seething on the one side and seces-
sion lowering on the other. Still neither party
openly declared the truce at an end. The me-
mory OF the past contest inculcated caution.
Arkansas and Florida ON the South, Michigan,
Wisconsin and Iowa. in the North, entered the
Union without stirring the smouldering embers.
Texas reused an incipient glow, but it faded.
So long as the question of principle could be
vaded both parties were content to let the
Missouri compromise rest in peace, preserving
the practical balance of power as it was
AT length, after repeated menaces, the two
rival sections were brought face to face by the
treaties which secured US Oregon and New
Mexico, and the sudden settlement OF California.
The North sgain took the field as it did in
1870, with a proviso claiming for Con-
gress the right to forbid slavery in newly
acquired territory. A long and successful
agitation of abolition theories, and large
accession of numerical strength, had given the
anti.slavery party power and holiness they
did not possess thirty years before. Fortunately,
this advantage was more than counterbalanced
by the enlarged experience Of our leading
statesmen and the sharpened perceptions of the
South In spite of clamor and popular outcry
in the North, majority Of both Houses, after o
three years struggle. nobly resolved to adhere
to the constitution, and to renounce on behalf
of Congress any right, title or authority to con-
troll or designate the domestic institutions OF
new States. This resolution, miscalled the
compromise Of 1850, was in plain terms re-
iteration and practical application of the doc
trines embodied in the constitution; and as
such, of course, was virtual disavowal Of the
pledge of 1921. Ireaffrmed the independence
Of the States, and yielded to them full and un-
controlled power to regulate all such of their
concerns as were not expressly surrendered to
Congress BY the act of confederacy. Viewed in
this light by the people, it was hailed with joy.
as wholesome return towards sound princi-
pies nd-the absurd assertions of the present
administration to the contrary notwithstand-
ing-served to elect Gen. Pierce by majority
little short of being unanimous.
These acts Of 1860 were, as we said, an at
tempt to retrace the false step we made in
1921. They went a certain way towards attain
ng that end, inasmuch as they established prin.
ciple contrary to that Of the Missouri compro-
mise. But still the latter was left mistaken.
Thus. from the day California was lett to say
whether she would employ slave labor or not
the statute book presented the anomaly of two
acts, dramatically antagonistc in spirit and
principle, both clothed with equal vigor and au-
thority. This contradiction could not last long
The slightest pretext was sure to bring into col
lision the rival principles of the Missouri COM
promise and the laws of 1850; and in that col
lision one Of the two could not help but yielJ.
The collision has come. Nebraska, q ter
ritory without inhabitants, is sought to be
introduced to the Union. Citizens in some
Of the Western States intend to populate it;
whether they will or not does not matter. The
particular case which happens to bring up the
question is unimportant. If Nebraska were
barren rock the principle would be the same,
and the controversy would not be altered
Whatever regret may flow from the prospect of
an angry commotion throughout the country on
the subject of territory whose material value
may yet be small. we find ample consolation in
looking forward to the final settlement of q de-
bate which, had the stake been greater, might
have plunged the Union into actual war. 1t
is fortunate, moreover, that 30 formidable q
question should have arisen at time when no
distractiDg causes are operating to divert mems
minds from its study-when peace with foreign
powers and prosperity at home enable us to
give it all the attention it deserves. It is now
fairly before us. Without glazing dishonesty
IL cannot be shirked or eyaded The nrohlem
must be solved one way or the other, finally,
definitely, for all time.
1t is not a question of slavery or freedom
1t is not question of breaking or keeping past
pledges. 1t is not question of advancing one
section of the country at the expense of the
other. 1t is simply question of Interpretation
and plain common sense. Did the constitu
ton authorize Congress to regulate the kind Of
labor new States were to employ? That is the