The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-06-01

THE HARD SHE'LL CONGRESSIONAL ADDRESS
TOTAL SMASH Up OF THE New York Demo.
cRAcY.-The address signed by Hon. james
Maurice, John Wheeler, Jared V. Peck, Rufus
W. Peckham, and Andrew Olivee, of the New
York hard shell delegation who voted against The
Nebraska bill, has appeared in the newspapers
If il were not 20 long should give IL place
in our columns. The pith and Substance of it,
however, may be summed up in few words
They justify their votes against the Nebraska
bill on the following grounds
II not the bill originally reported TO the Senate
was urged through by tyrannical exercise of power
the part Of the majority.
On the 18th October, 1862 excepting those in govern
men employ, there only three white settlers in
all of Kansas and Nebraska Consequently there was no
necessity for such hurry with the bill.
Tie Indian titles not extngushei in said Terri.
tories
Tic Territorial governments win confer additional
patronage upon Gen. Pierce, and against this our we
hard shells enter explicit insurance.
The bill violates the Baltimore democratic platform of
1852, and the Compromise Of 1885, and Gen.
Pierce Violates his inaugural
The bill is calculated to revive mischievons aota
ton.
President Polk Pinckncy Douglass Atchson and other
democratic authorities Agey quoted to prove the
Missouri Compromse a binding compact.
The I've refractory hards declare that they
to believe that the repeal Of the Missouri restriction
but the first ofa series of for building up
powerful Southern sectional party to be headed by
President.
And these are the reasons which they offer
for voting against the bill Cur tono? What
is to follow The soft shell lea !ers and the
soft shell or ans have still more violently taken
the field against q the Nebraska iniquity,' as
they term It !; and where, them are the New
York democracy? Are Francis B. Cutting
Mike Walsh, Thomas W. Cumming, Peter Rowe,
John j. Taylor William NJ. Tweed, Hiram Wal
bridge, William A. Walker, and Theodore We
brook-the nine hards and softs who vote Z
the bill--are they sufficiently strong to REQ =,
| nize and rc-unitc the New York democratic
party upon The Nebraska PLATFORM Are not
some of them high in favor with the admins
tratoD, while others are dead against it? How,
then, are they to agree upon plan for
| re. organizing the party /? The thing is
out of the question. The party in New
York is substantially smashed up, knocked into
pieces. and gone to the dogs. The work com.
nenccd with the free soil spoils system of the
administration has been beautifully accom-
plished by the healing oxpedient of the Nebras-
ka bill Where the administration is next to
turn up defes I'll human calculation But we
know exactly what it has done for the triumph
ant. glorious and uproarious New York demo
cratic party of 1852. II has divided 1t, subdi-
sided it, and left the fragments to eat up each
other
Grand, gloomy, and very peculiar, exceed
ingly funny, and prodigiously perplcxing, is
the foggy prospect thus opened before us for
our next November elections. There is no
wing party, no democratic party, on the track.
lh'y are washed away and their loose materi-
ais, after floating broadcast npon the tide, like
uriiiwood in high freshei, will be found when
the waters reccde, high and dry, In mixed
masses OF rubbish, at the head Of every islaud
and pro. ection Of the shores of Salt river The
way Is thus opened for the temperance party or
The Krow-Nothngs to sweep the State psyt
fall, unless the antislavery movements Of 50
ward and bis allies and the Van Buren, free
.olers shouli rally grand national organiSa-
son Of both the old political parties to the
rescue.
AZ y ey:>ts IT. .err:c::::.'. :,sa! rev tat