The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-01-26
TEE CASE TRULY STATED.

The reader must excuse US, but on such
subject as that brought up by the Nebraska
Bill and Report, we intend to iterate and re-
iterate the Truth as it is.
All sorts of sophistry and falsehood are now
resorted to, for the purpose of mystifying the
People in regard to the Nebraska movement.
We, who oppose the abrogation of the Mis-
souri, Compromise now, it is sneeringly remark
ed, were bitterly hostile to it in 1850. This is
false. That Compromise was not under dis
cussion in 1850; no party were arrayed for or
against it. Nobody proposed to disturb it.
What we did oppose was motion to form
new Compromise, by which the line agreed
upon in 1920, viz SO deg 80 min, should be
extended to the Pacific ocean, with a provision
that Slavery should not exist north, and the
understanding that it should exist south of
that line. This was the motion Of Mr.. Doug
las; it proposed a new Compromise, not the
reaffirmation of the old one. The Pro Slavery
part of the latter was a fact accomplished-th
Anti Slavery part remained to be accomplish
ed. The new Compromise proposed to surren-
der the larger portion of the Territory acquired
from Mexico to Slavery, and also to abandon
to the curse, the whole of whatever acquisi-
tons we might thereafter make on this CONT
nent, south of SO deg. 80 min. A proposition
SO monstrous coald not bo tolerated even by
the hack politicians of the North.
Had an attempt been made in 1850 to abro-
gate the Missouri Compromise, we should have
ID 6 &Lo Shok
such an attempt now-because the only part
Of 1t remaining to be fulfilled as mhat Freedom
gained by it. Bat this is the very reason why
the Pro- Slavery Party now seek its abrogation
All that remains of it is, solemn provision,
without which Missouri could not have been
admitted into the Union that slavery shall be
sforeUer" excluded from all the original Terri
tory of louisiana, north of SO deg 80 min, and
therefore it must be repealed This is the
good faith of the Slave Power. This is the
fragrant swindle it is scheming, under cover of
the ompromises of 1850.
Suppose this vast region of Nebraska had
first been settled, and organized into free
States and that the settlement of the Territory
south of 36 deg 80 min. had been so delayed
that its different portions were now for the Fl rst
time to be brought under government, what an
cutlery would be raised in the South, should
the representatives Of the North deliberately
attempt to establish Free instead of Slavehold-
ing Institutions therein-and this, too, although
no express provision, no faith plighted in words,
could be appealed to against such movement
Treachery! Punic Faith! Hypocrisy. would
be Numbered in the ears of the North, and we
should soon hear of another Nashville Conyen-
ton, to deliberate on "the mode and measure
of redress for tie foul wrongs inflicted on the
South.
How much more a.rocious the violation Of
good faith In the actual case submitted to us
The Union was shaken to its foundations in
1820-the friends of constitutional liberty had
the majority, and they repeatedly refused to
allow Missouri to come in as Slave State
feeling then, as the Independent Democracy
feels now, that the extension of Slavery, and
the multiplication Of Slave States, were not con.