The daily union., 1854-11-19

|
for the country to determine
Witain cur months after the presidential election Con-
PASSED an ACT TO organize the Territory of Washing
ton Ihs was the first Territory formed after the adop-
iion OF the compromise measures of 1850 In order
dersahd distinctly the provisions that act and their
bearing upon The present question: il is necessary bear
III ina tat The Territory OF Washington formerly
tuted part of the Territory of Oregon and that Oregon
Was organized on the l4th of August ls4s with pro-
'so uecng the ordlnanee of 1884, for the prohibition
OF slavery TO be IN force in the whole of that Territory
"teh 'e nl Was presented 10 President Polk for his sg
% nc hesi'aeh about signing IT, upon the ground Of
that slavery prohibition but when he concluded to do So
nc accompanied his approval with message the House
OF representatives where the bill originated which he
declared IN substance that he signed the bill with the
uersanding that the Missouri line be extended
tne racine and because prohibition Of slavery in Oregon
would be consistent with the Missouri Compromise if thus
extended the whole of that Territory being north of SO
ues 80 nin But he also said in the message that
he never would have approved Of the bill containing that
prohibition under other circumstances than the conf
dent expectation that the Missouri line be adhered
70 anu carried out III the mode suggested Whon, however
he Missouri line abandoned and the great principle
OF selgovernment substituted it by the Compromise
soo Tue question naturally arose upon what plan the Ter
ritory ot Washington should be organized
By reference 10 the it will be the ordinance
oi 1885, prohibiting slavery in Oregon omitted in the
MI organizing Washington and if render the inen
oh oi The legislature clear and certain the 18th section
The o provides what Of Congress passed prior that
e should be in force and omitng and thereby exelud
ng the organic law Of Oregon and the ordinance of 1881
from being longer in force in the Territory of Washington
lhus II appears that in the bill establishing the Territory
pf Washington which the first and only Territory
created since the adoption Of the Compromise of 1850 and
before the Introduction of the Nebraska bil the prohib
ton OF slavery was not only omitted but slavery proh
iton winch had been for several in force in the
territory was absolutely repealed and the people allowed
10 settle The slavery question for themselves precisely
hey are In uiah and New MexcOunder the Compromise
OF 1850 and IN Kansas and Nebraska under the organ
Ang those Territories How does il happen that the
nado OF vrtuous indignation against the Nebraska bill
because the prohibition of slavery repealed order
to enable the people to govern themselves not raised
~ uho ,slarf ttinn
was repealed under precisely the circumstances
me journals show that the Washington bill passed the
House by 100 majority and that nearly every northern
whie voted for it. including the only whig member from
thus State X Yates and that it passed the Senate without
dvision-no one feeling disposed call the yeas
and nays. Ten months after The Washington Territory
was established introduced the bill to organize the Terri
tories OF Kansas and Nebraska and in order carry
IN good faith the principles Of the Compromise of 1850
clause was introduced to render the old prohibition of
slavery imperative and void and leave the people free
10 form and regulate their domestic institutions in their
own way subject only to the constitution of the United
States Now, those who voted for and sustained the
Washington bill the oadest and the erces in their
denuncations of the Nebraska bill when the two meas
ares carry out precisely the same principle in different
form OF words under circumstances identical in
teral point
lnow the consideration of those provisions of
the Nebraska bill which have been most fercey assaed
1t has been said and repeated in the non-save
holding States that the intention and legal effect of
the measure to extend slavery and to egsate into
ritory free Ii is certain that those who make this
charge have read the bill comprehended its prn
cpes otherwise they stand convicted by the law itself of
stating that which expressly contradcted by the terms
OF the act 1t would be positive violation of the princi
pies OF the Nebraska bill either for Congress to extend
circumscrbe the institution of saveryeither to establish
or abolish iteher to legislae into any Territory
out OF any Territory The law declares the 4th section
IL being the rae intent ana meany Of this act not 10 gis
late slavery INTO any Territory State sreud It there
ro but 10 lace TIC people thereof per ecty res 10 form and
only 10 s constellation of the Uated States GAppause1
If the principle be right to allow the people to govern
themselves in all that relates to their domestic and internal
policy then the Nebraska bill is right If that principle
be wrong, the Nebraska bill is wrong Why should
the people Of Kansas and Nebraska be allowed govern
themselves Are they net capable Of sefgovernment
ho are they and whence did they from that they
not be trusted with this sacred rght2 Did they egrae
from Illinois and Kentucky, from Pennsy vania and Vr
gnia and the other States Of the Union We're they not
capable of deciding this slavery question for themselves
before they left their homes in the States No douhs
that so will il be contended tina, these people have
lost their capacity govern themselves simply because
they have demonstrated their spirit and enterprise b,
moving little farther West the grand march progress
and civilization? repeat the question then why should
they not be permitted to exercise this privilege which has
been declared to be the brthrght of frecmen by our rep
resenatives in the legislature and which say they
no, be deprived of without being reduced condition of
political oondagef Applause. The abolitionists admit
their Willingness to allow the people exercise this right
all other matters except that African slavery Why make
this exception Their answer is because slavery is horrd
crime ltbea crime that eony crime that the people
Territory and OF the States called upon provide
againstf Murder is supposed to be crime and robbery
let De Oppeu 10 any man VINO VIII
show me act of Congress providing for the punishment
of either in organized Territory of the United States
Will ii be said that Congress encourages and supports
der and robbery and larceny in the Territories because
stead OF establishing criminal code for the people, they
have granted them legislature, and lett the people free
make their own laws and to form their criminal code
through their representatives elected for that purpose
They tell us that slavery evil affecting nurousy the
morals OF both the white and the black Ii 1t be is il
the only moral evil that the people OF the Territory
called upon to protect themselves against? know ny
good and true who believe that the and abuse
manufacture and sale of ardent spirits is grievous evil
injurious the morals of the community but have never
known OF them to petition Congress for the pass
age of fundamental and irrevocabe law that brandy
should te used introduced into Territory of
the United States into any State hereafter be formed
thereroni Nor have | ever known them petition
Cpngrrs in favor of geographical line across the con
uncnL oiefa.iEs iiquos sidH, and forever pro-
nb.uug The other. Our temperance friends under
stand the constitution and the principles Of gov
ernnent too we'll 10 call upon Congress esaie upon
matters purely OF local and domestic character When
they desire exert their for the suppression Of the
evils oi ntemperance they the habit of appIyn
the legislatures OF the and Territories where they
live for the passage of all needu laws for the
of the public morals Why the aboiiiousts learn
the theory of government from the friends of
rance and trust to the people OF each State and Territory
to make whatever ws necessary for the public morals
aud for the suppression of crme2 They tell that the
gnrs of the saee 10 he conide the
certain and p-rous protection OF the people Ola Territory
Are they any sacred than the rights of the white
They do object giving the legislatures OF the
white people subject other limitation than that
which the constitution imposes They willing allow
he legislature prescribe and regulate the relations Of
husband and wife parent aud child but they shocked
aud servant DO they regard The rights the negro
sacred than their and ehil.