Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1854-03-02
LYNCHBURG VlRGINIAN.



Hon. r. N. T. Hunter addressed the Senate
last Thursday. on the Nebraska tlh in speech
said to have been marked by the dignity, learn
ing and power. which distinguish must Of his Sen.
atorial arguments--but of which have only
yet seen the subjoned summary
Mr. HUNTER said that it had been complained
that this question had been thrust upon the SEN
ate unnecessarily. He did not think 50. II
came up a. a natural consequence of the course
pursued in 1850 in framing what were called the
compromise acts. He could not conceive how
the majority in Congress, or Of the people who
approved those nets. could vote against this bill
without great inconsistency
The Missouri question was settled by estab-
ishinga dividing line between slnseholding and
non.siaveholaing territory. Though opposed to
that act. the south had acqueseed in IT, and had
ever bern disposed 90 abide by ii. In the Ore
gon hill they favored it, but it was voted down by
nearly unanimous vote of the north. In 1850
the north refused IL. They admitted few poo-
pile settled On the Pacific. not only State, bat
gave them the sanction of Congress 10 their TAX
ing all the territory they desired or thought prop
er to include within the limits of their State
The south goi in those measures a declaration
that Congress had 10 power TO prohibit slavery
in the Terriioiie., and that the people there
should have the right TO regulate their own do
nestle Institutions. Practically the south was
excluded from tire whole of that Territory, yet il
acquieseed and all that was now asked was that
the same principle adopted in the [ tab bill should
be extended to other territory.
He did nnt regard the Missouri net a com
pact, or as compromise: or If was a eompro-
mise, ii was one from which the south had long
since been ah,olyed by the frequent failures of
the north TO observe il. He gave history of the
compromise of lS20 showing ihat the great body
of the south in both houses opposed and voted a
gainst il. II was a northern measure The
north broke il in 1891 by refusing Ia admit Mis-
sour, aud had constantly since then voted II
down ON every occasion when il was offered
How could the north then call upon the south, in
the name Of honor and sacred fifth, II observe
a bargain which il had repudiated 1t remncd
him Of the sanetimouious pirate mentioned 10y
Shakespeare, who carried with him 10 sen the ten
commandments, but blotted out the one which he
had no desire TO observe. The Senator from
Massachusetts was in favor of observing the con.
tract when II was To his advantage to do 50, but
not otherwise.
The constitution of the United States was
framed TO secure equality among The stat :, 10
preserve sdomoste tranquility, aud secure the
blessings OF liberty TO all. How could these OBJ
jecs be carried out if ono section of The country
was TO have unjust discrimination made n
gainst its citizens The whole spirit of the con
stitution secured 10 all the States equal share
interested in these Territories in two-fold man
ner--frst in the proceeds Of the sales Of the pub
lie lands, and secondly in the right of the people
TO settle upon and use them II n proposition
were made to give TO the free States all the pro-
ceeds of the sales of the lands. its unconstituon
atty would be admitted. But there wasno differ
ence between such proposition and one 10 give
the people of the north the exclusive right TO set
tie upon and enjoy them.
lie thought the people of the Territories ought
to have the power over all rightul subjects of c-
glslation, subject only TO the condition that they
should pass no act destroying the equality of the
States, Whether the people had any right to
sovereignty, was question Which this bill left to
the courts 10 decide.
He then referred 10 various decisions of the
supreme Court TO show the uneonsttutionaty
ofthe exercise of sovereignty by Congress over
the Territories and held that under these decis-
ions the ordinance of rs and the Missouri com
pr )nfise were both unconstitutional.
He admitted that there was no reasonable
ground for surprising that either Nebraska or
Kansas would become slave States. lie urged,
however, that the dispersion of the slaves into
greater number Of States would be beneficial not
only to the slaves but to their owners, aud would
by reducing the comparative ratio OF population
with the whites, disarm the question of much Of
its cause for excitement
He supported this measure as enc promising
peace and tranquility 10 the country. lie depic
ted the grand events in which this nation would
be called upon to take part and urged the neces-
sty Tor union and harmony Mt home aud the fol
ly OF being distracted upon such miserable trHes,
as whether there should be few more slaves west
of the Mississippi, and few less east of il.
He referred to the gallant democratic northern
States who had come To- the rescue of these qucs-
tons, and to dispose oft iorever-nanng among
them Miehigan,s Illinois, Indiana, Pennsy lyania,
New Hampshire, Iowa, aud California.