Plymouth banner. (Plymouth, Marshall County, Ind.) 1852-1855, 1854-08-24
For CongTess-9M District
NOR NAN EDDY Of ST. J0. County.


Plymouth Banner. who for some years
ago, claimed to be a Wing. but who
did not, we believe, vote for Gen. Scott
and who has been Nebraska man foI
many months past. is to give in his ad-
hesion at the Democratic Congressional
Convention to-day. All right, II he
will feel more at home there;and far better
than to profess neutrality where ii does
not exist.-South Bend Reg. l7th.
AS political parties are at present or
ganized-or rather disorganized and mix
ed together-there seems to be but ,
single question Of any considerable po-
li,ical import. upon which they are sue
csssful in agitaiing the public mind
which is: shall the people of the Terri.
tories enjoy the right of forming theil
own constitutions upon TIE subject oil
slavery. preparatory TO an admission into
the Union. or shall Congress retain the
right to say. when they do apply for cd
mission. that they shall or shall no,
come in with constitutions recognizing
slavery or freedomf In lis discussion.
the repeal of the Missouri Compromise
line Of SO o 80 is involved. and the
right of Congress to repeal il is contested
By some. and BY Others favored.
The compromise was simply the act OF
Congress. and il is silly TO contend that
at one session that body cannot repeal
an act adopted 8, .former one. But
the whole opposition TO lis repeal is
based upon the ground OF its irezpedi
ency. When in this alone consists the
only cause of extraordinary excitement.
We are led 10 wonder why 1t Is Chat men
adhering to tho principles of patriotism.
should become so excita bic end exasper-
ated at others who might differ with
them simply upon the practicabili!y OF q
measure, as to think for momen. Of o
sacrifice of a Union of the States.
II il alledged b. some northern men
that il was through southern influence
aided by northern doughfaces. thu. this
solcmn compromise was repealed. end
that its repeal ends ell confidence and
good faith which heretofore existed be-
tween the two sections o! the Union
The act is termed a ST:nd!c. and those
who favored il denounced as traitors,
dough faces. &c; for differing with their
neighbors simply upon the prac.iccJiIity
of measure. A recurrence TO o few
past transactions in relation to the prin-
ciples involved in this controversy. may
not be un p rof,s Bile or uninteresiing.
The original western terminus Of the
Missouri compromise was OF the Missis
sippi River. 1t so remained for nbous
35 years On the admission Of Taxes
into the Union In 1915. 1t was extended
to the Rio Grande. Ia 1913 PROPOSE
,ion was made in Congress TO append its
extension to the Pacific. 10 the Oregon
bill. from which point rs further extern
sion would not soon'have been thought OF.
as it would have covered all our territory
ond all that there was any probability of
our acquiring. The south willingly sus-
tanned its extension, but what said the
north then to this solemn compromise.
this only northern dependence. this ven
cradle agreement which had preserved
peace and quiet between the north and
south for SO many long end prosperous
years-the only governmental &C: tina,
promised perpetuation OF the Union?
Was its solemnity and binding qualities
adhered to with the same tenacity then
as now? Did fanaticis.n either north or
south rail and Glamour fer its continu-
ance and extension7 II passed the Senate,
but the House voted IL down b. norihern
rotes. and then sprang into existence the
Wilmot Prouiso. proUiding that NO
MORE SLAVE TERRITORY SHOULD
EVER BE INTRODUCED into the
Union, either north or south Of the
Missouri compromise line. This pro
viso was held over the heads OF the south
for two years. with sufficient majority
from the northern States to carry il
through the House. il every northern
man had then been willing to violate
the Missouri compromise TO favor one
part Of the Union at the expense of the
other; but in 1850 California came into
the Union through the memorable com
promise measures Of that year. with a
constitution framed and adopted by her
own citizens. II was south Of SO : 3O'
and IN Its admission the principles Of
NON INTERvENrEoE AND POPULAR sovE-
RETGNTY in the Territories was clearly
and unequivoca!ly recognized by Con
sress Any further urging Of the VIII.
mot Proviso became unnecessary.
Senator HALE Of New Hampshire was
by no means an obscure or idle partici-
pant in the proceedings had for the ex.