The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1854-05-05

* pressed for the opinions Of British LORD
Chancellor delivered to the House OF Com
mons in a case in which he had no concern.
Sir, | suppose can be allowed to repeat on
this hOor any degree of comparison or Inquire
Of speech which Mr.. Burke could use on the
floor Of the British House of Commons. He
was classic speaker, and besides that, an
author Of a tree ties Oh the sublime and beau
tiful. do not consider the particular hgure
which | have to repeat, although just and
picturesque in itself, to be perfect illustra-
tion Of either branch of his admired treatise. Z
II was in reference to Lord Thuriow, who
had INTERVIEWED in some legislative business,
contrary &c the orators sense of right and
decency. MIR. Burke repulsed the intrinsic
opinion, and declared that he did not care
three jumps OF a louise for il. Sir, say
the same OF any opinion which may be re-
ported here from ou- Secretaries on any bill
depending before US, and that in any form
in which it may come from them, whether
as unit or integers. Still less do admit
the right of Intervention in our legislative
duties in another class OF Intermediates, and
who might not be able to NEEDLE at all with |
our business were il not for the ministration
of our country. -.
lspeak of the public printers who get their
daily bread, and that buttered on both sides
by our daily printing, who require the Dem
ocratic members of this House, under the in.
slant penalty of political damnatiop, to give
in their adhesion to every bill which they
call administration, and that in every change
it may undergo, although more changeable
than the moon. For that class of informed
dlers We have no Parliamentary law to adj
minister, nor any annexation from Burke to
apply, nothing but little fable TO read, the
value of which, as in all good fables. lies in
its moral. 1t is in French. and entitled
."L'Asse ettson Maitre," which being done
into English, signifies the "ass and his mas
ter" 1t was this: An ass took it into his
head to scare his master, and put on a lions
skin, and went and stood in the path, and
when he saw his master coming, he COM
menced roaring as he thought, but he only
brayed, and his master knew it was his ass,
so he went up to him with his cudgel, and
beat him nearly TO death. That is the end
OF the fcble, and the moral OF it is a caztion
TO all asses TO take care how they undertake
TO scare their masters. Excessive laughter
long continued cries of "not bad" "good,"
aha, ha!"] Mr.. Chairman, this House will
have fallen far below its constitutional mis-
sion il it suffers itself to be governed by au.
thority or draeoned by its own hirelings. I
am man OF no bargains, but act openly Will,
any man that acts for the public good, and
in this spirit offer the right hand of politi.
cal friendship to every member Of this body
that will stand together to vindicate its priv
ileges, protect its respeciabilty and main
tain it in the high place for which it was in
tended-the master branch Of the A merican
Government. The question before us is 10
get rid o. the Missouri compromise line, and
to lawyer that is an easy question. That
compromise is in the form Of statute, and
one statute is re peard 10y another. That view
Is enough Tor lawyer; 10 a statesman il is
something different and refers the question Of
its repeal not To law books, but to reasons of
State policy, 10 the circumstances under
which it was executed, aud the consequences
wh Oh are to flow from its abrogation. This
CONF premise of 1920 is not mere s;a,ute 10
last for day. Ii was intended in pcrpetuiiy,
and so declared itself. 1t is an enactme mt
to settle a controversy, and did settle il, and
cannot be abrogated without rtviv,ng that
controversy. 1t has given the country peace
Tor above thirty years; how many years OF
disturbance will its abrogation bring! That
is the statements question; and without as
suming TO be much of statesman, | claim
to be enough 80 TO consider the consequences
Of breakin. settlement which pacitied
continent. | remember the Missouri con-
troversy, and how it destroyed all social feel
ing and all capacity for beneficial legislation,
and merged all political principle in an angry
contest about slavery, dividing the Union
into two parts, and drawing up the two haltes
into opposite and confronting lines, like enc.
mics on the field of battle. d, not wish to
see such times again, and therefore | am
against reviving them by breaking up the
settlement which Quoted them. The Mis-
souri, compromise of 1920 was the partition
ing between the free and slave States of a
great province, taking the character of per-
Petual settlement, and CHASING with the two
great compromises which wave us the ordi-
nance Of july Is, 1887, aud the Federal Con-
sliiution Of September 18th of the same
year. -f
There are three slavery compromises in
our history which conf ect themselves with
the foundation and the preservation of this
p, Union. First, the territorial partition or
dinance of 1881, with its clause for the recov-
cry of fugitive slaves. Secondly, the con-
temporaneocs constitutional rec, gnition of
slavery in the States which choose to have
it with the fugitive slaves recovery clause in
the same instrument. Thirdly, the Missouri
partition line OF 1920, with the same cl use
annexed for the recovery oil fugitive slaves;
oil three OF these compromises are part and
parcel Of the same policy. and neither OF them
could have been formed without the other,
nor either Of them without the fugitive slave
clause !ded to it. The Constitution could
not have Ueen formed without its recognition
OF slavery in the States which chose it, and
the guarantee OF the right t. recover slaves
! fleeing in'o tie free States. The Missouri
con roversy could not have been settled with.
out the addition OF the same clause for the re.
covery of fugitive slaves. Thus al these
| com promises are settlements of existing
questions aud intending to be perpetual.
They are all three OF equal moral validity.