New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-02-18

fIre,t Britain or Russia viii the slsveholng States SUI
q, much less aid us TO to restore the equilibrium
r, mo- r. nn,ecessary measure we shall have
wisely 40 kurriedly 60 suicdaly subverted
Nor am be told that only lev slaves VII en1ef
;.b scces. 10 The Executive at Washington exercises
more noliticsl influence than FIVE hundred freeoen lb
not neeesssry that az or s)ory 81 'se IsxeSodinp
STATE Delaware has only coo slaves against 81 O nee
men and vet Delaware slavehoding State. The Pro
portion substantially different IN Maryland ana us
souri and vet they are savehoding States These sur
sre the stakes in this legislative game IN which lament
10 see that while the representatives OF me
State are unanimously and earnestly playing to WIN so
many Of the representatives Of the nonslayeh9idhs
States are with greater zeal and diligence P'!ihs
TO lose. oso1
these twin bills for the organization Of the Territories OF
Nebrasks and Kanzas hold the affirmative In the argu
What i the case they present to the Senate and the
county, .n.. h,.
IN before they had introduced even conceived this bold
ard daring measure Of abrogating the Missouri ComPro
mise directs all lie arguments against IT,
ts tie ehsfaeser Of the controversy IN respect to iAs
territory eqare eT Mexico similar aae'a e s ~ p ,
a. When be Indian laws shall Be "ndrsHn Aad hs oosay
Ios Srn e ,T IS. pso 1e Of the M.o T.rty = %
.eos.aiiop 6o1san AID Or .di.n ., 'aes
SAFE The Union on an equ.l ons - "A 6e ouqes s si
sve Z II 5sS ,5sr1 se ed5 b Fe. TO ne
rr,.s st.,.. under the nome Of Loui.sna which lies noh Of
'tis c,srst' and thirty mtoois' ror ',oie p "a
,voier,S,y ssTvads oherwe thes P4nu Of enss
.tt1eby sst prohibited Profse 11yI That sny person es
pins i1to the s.Is from Whom l.G2 5 Cd 49, 1,
NAY tslaEizy reclaimed and eove Cd to tie T-I''n '-' "
Unser i i steion as Of tie He,a AZ 10 Ss~
m he SebrE. eolutrJ rod enactment The deeson Of 80
o.t.lan nyovs eorsii utOns gosef Of Cons'. 20
sio q Orion IN he oIiao1 q tho's sp11
10 st Sf:3 hS Ss ,Sl - 70 tie Omission Of null
y The
rer .r,tsn tie doctrine that TIE Con,uio. o. ne ca1
Of ne Terdto,s bis property Of Ehaver IND and '
tsd hold snd eroy ne s.es ss5 70 enr t5 tho
ee5.ioD eOnt1oyrse qnS.,i35s tasy Ne az
IL ,Yfei prsle u Coos aemed Wis tad
g Issn from dsesP Pf9 ~ Ne 4 esS Or b ee
re tue nfer Of The COnsiItaiop and n. s1t.p o. '
.r no. pIsr.rsd eeommend depsita.s ron tn
r. The tb section the M.so Act or By Any act decsoy ~
ne meaning the COnci'uion Ia respect to the legal PoD " u.s.
his report gives US the deliberate Judgment Of the Com
mitiee on two important points FIRST that ihe Clm
nrome cfls5O did not by its letter or by It's spirit repeal
or render necessary propose the abrOg1lon Of
the Missouri Compromise and secondly mat the MISSOURI
Sir lar do we next hear from this Committee Frst two
similar rnd kindred bills actually sbrogating the Missouri
Comprome which in their report they had tod os ought
not TO be abrogated at all Secondly these DIS declare
n Their face in substance, that that Compromise was
air adv sbrogaed by the srr OF that very Compromise OF
1870 which in their epOthey had just shown US ie tho
Counromo of $50 absolutely unaffected and unmpaired.
Thirdly the Committee favor u.s. by Their Chairman, WIN
en- oral explanation that the amended bills abrogang the
Missouri Compromise identical with their previous bill
which did not abrOgate it, and only made to dter in
pbraseoloey to the end that the provisions contained IN
their rrey Ous snd discarded bill shall be abs utey
clear and certain
enteroip great respect for the Committee itself but
must take leave TO say that the Inconsistencies aud self
contradictions contained in the papers II has gwen u.s.
have destroyed all claims The part OF those documents
TO respect here elsewhere Hers there was burst OF
applause in the galleries c-.--... e ,o-o
uron the Compromise of 1890 finally revised, correc
led and amended here i'll the face of the Senate means
afer all substantially what that recital meant az 1t stoCd
before it perfected, or else means nothing angOie
or worthy Of consideration at all What the spirit or
even tie letter of the Compromise laws OF 1850 dd con
hict with the Compromise OF 1870 The COMPROMISE OF
1920 wac by it, very nature Compromise rrepeaia6ie
and unchangeable without violation OF honor justice
and good faith The Compromise OF 1850 II Il impaired
the previous Compromise to the extent OF the loss t Tree
labor Of one acre Of the Territory of Nebraska was either
absolutely void ought in all subsequent legislation to
be- deemed and held void
violation of the Compromise OF 1870 lhen nasmdc.
az the Compromise Of 1870 was invoable The attempted
violation OF il shows that the so called Conn Tomse OF
$50 was TO that extent not Compromise at all, but a
fictitious spurious, and pretended Compromise Nhai
the letter the spirit Of the Compromise OF 1851 dd SD
perede or impair or even conflict win inc OompT;e Oh
leo Then that is reason not for GOTosatihs we Hre
pealable end nyiOabe Compromise of 1870 but the spu
rious and pretended Compromise OF ls50
Mr. President why is this for the proposed abro
am IL s unnecessary. The ssgnmeni OF reason adds
nothing to the force weight OF the aorogaron itsoi
Either the fact alleged a. reason is true orr IS not uue
Ift be untrue your asserting II here Will not make true
Iii be true il apparent in the text of the law OF 1850
without the aid of legislative exposition now us unusual
IL is upparlamentary. The language OF the iawgyer
whether the sovereign be democratic republican OF ee'
potic Is always the IL is mandatory, imperatiye
fthe gver explains at all in statute the reason 10
H. the reason that is his peasure-sle roO sac J"do
Look AT the Compromise 1870 Does plead excuse
for lis commands Look at the Compromise of ls'O
drawn by the master hand of our American chatham
Does that bespeak your favor by clubbing or shnlf
epoogy Look at your own now rejected hrst Neorask
h which BY conclusive implication saved the effect Of IL
Missouri Compromise Look at any other bieyer repore
by the Committee Territories Look at any other b no'
on your examine all the laws on statute DOCK
Doyou find any one bill statute which ever came DO"
ing STOPPING and wTig Cling into the Senate pleading
excuse its clear and explicit declaration OF me soye
eign and irresistible will of the American People Ia
departure nom this habit in this SOLITARY case petra!
self DISTRICT and attempt the part Of the bill to dive
the public attention to raise complex and lmmaten
issues perplex and bewlder and conio1nd the feoP
nv whom This transaction s to be reviewed Look sga
III TIE yaclaon betrayed in the frequent changes OF %
structure of this apology At first the recital told us th
the eighth section Of the COMPROMISE act OF ls-o WI
,uperseded by the principles of the Compromise laws
ls5C-as if any one had ever heard of supersedeas
one locallaw by the mere Prneps OF another local a'
enacted for altogether different region thirty yea
aferyard On another day. we were told. by an amen
inert of the recital that the Compromise OF lsO was
superseded by the Compromise of 1850 at all but was on
Inconsistent with it-ss II local act which was rr
peaable was now TO be sbrOgated because was lneo
sstent with a subsequent enactment. which had no app
cation whatever within the region 10 which the nrst e.
Gctme nj confined On third day the me aiming OF II
recital further and finally elucdated by an amenden
which declared that the first irspeasbe act proteetu
Nebraska from Slavery was now declared ln0peEan'
and void. because it was inconsistent with the pFese
purposes OF Congress 10 egisate slavery into al
Territory or State, nor 10 exclude IL thereirom
But take this apology in whatever form it may be e
pressed, and test lie logic by simple process