Southern sentinel. [volume] (Plaquemine, Parish of Iberville [La.]) 1848-1858, 1854-03-04
THE BILL.

Nebraska bill Of Judge DOUGLASS, Illinois Sena-
tor, will finally be passed, as amended by the au-
thor with reference TO slavery. There seems to
be a disposition to get the above bill through
mainly foI the reason that it will settle definitely
that non-intervention by Congress with regard tc
slavery in the States and Territories, is the cor
rect principle, and is thus understood by the Con-
stitution.
In our former article upon this subject we were
slightly in error in two ins,ances-,he result of
that hasty manner in which editors are compelled
to treat all subjects of interest which from time
to time arise, of Whatever character, however in
significant, or however important, deep and intri-
cate. 1t is expected that his explanation or views
be gwen, IN his own language and al once. in a
manner that the subject can be easily and we'll TN
~derstood, and that his memory should be as mda-
ding as the evergreens Of the Andes. We DO not
say this because OF any remark respecting our
own faults which has come to cur ear; but be-
cause it is the general sentiment of the puzzle
mind with regard to editors-those "Wf.or, tna,e,;
fellows.
The Compromise of 1850 does nc; come in con.
tact with the passage of the above bill on the
question of slavery. Il Was very we'll as far as
1t went-but it was not sufficiently liberal or ex-
pansive upon that subject for in the Report of
Judge DOUGLASS, as Chairman of the Committee
on territories, transmitting back to the Senate the
nebraska bill, with various amendments, we find
the following language: @
"Your committee deem it fortunate for the
peace Of the country, and the security Of the
Union, that the controversy then resulted in
the adoption of the compromise measures,
which the two great political parties, with sin-
gular unanimity, have affirmed as a cardinal ar
ticle Of their faith. and proclaimed to the world
as n final settlement of the controversy and an
end of the agitation Adue respect, therefore,
for the avowed opinions of Senators, as well
as a proper sense of patriotic duty, ~enjoins up
on your committee the propriety and necessity
o! a strict adherence to the principles, and even
a literal adoption of the enqctmSnts of hat ad.
Justmsnt, in all their territorial bills so far as
the same are not local. oinapplicsb'e. Those
enactments embrace, among other things less
material to the matters under consideration
the following provisions:
when admitted as a State, the said territory or
the same, shall be received into the onion, with
or without slavery. as their constituents may pre-
scribe at the time of their admission,'n
The italics in the above are ours-and we mere
ly give the first enactment quoted, which it is de-
sired likewise to embrace ia the Nebraska bill,
because it is the question or clause which is crea-
ting the present excitement. @ 0
This bill then, it is shown, wishes the slavery
clause as embraced in the compromise measures,
to be applied to it. We do not see why it should
not. If Congress deemed that it was just, polite
and necessary, that the people Of a territory in
one section OF the country have the right to De-
eide upon the existence or non. existence of slave
ry, We do not see why the people of a territory
adjoining las We believe will be the case with re-
ference to the New Mexico and Nebraska Terri
tories have not the same right. 1t is irrelevant
to the matter at issue or in dispute, whether the
first territory was or was not obtained by con-
quest:
In the above extract, which the Chairman of
the Committee on Territories, in his Report,
takes from the Compromise act of 1850, Congress
acknowledges or proclaims, by admitting a State
Aheu t"S ShASAf "a Ah NiGotiIS q LC" Cldtey- Win
or without slavery, as their 1.-THE people of such
STATED Constitution may prescribe at the time of
their admission " that it has no right to interfere
with the domestic institutions of a State. This
extract is antagonistical in spirit to the Missouri
Compromise of 1920, which, by prohibiting sla-
very in any territory North of SO deg. 80 min. of
North latitude, asserted that it had the right to In
terfere in the matter of admitting slavery into the
territories-and if it has that right in territories it
has it in States. 1t is rather late to plead the in
volatility Of the Missouri Compromise, and that
if peace is desired for the country it should never
be i~nfringed upon, when in fact its very intent and
meaning was openly invaded by the above clause,
taken from the Compromise of 1850, establishing
the non-interference principle, on the part of Con-
gress, with the subject of slavery in the States or
Territories.
1t seems to us, then, that there is a great deal of
bill, on account Of the clause regarding slavery
If the opponents of the bill were in faver of the
Compromise of 1850, they cannot with any con-
sistency oppose the bill in question on account of
its slavery article, for it is the pery same which they
advocated four years since. Why should they OBJ
ject to Nebraska coming into the Union, or to be
formed into a Territory, with more restrictions
placed upon the rights and liberties of its people
people emigrated from enlightened sections of
our country, as would be the case-than were ap-
piled to the demi-savages Of New Mexico or the
polluted and ~fanaticai hordes of Utah? Would
fhoro he ;re{ico in e,,cb ~, o,f Mild }horo ho
reason or consistency in it, If right in one case
leaving the subject of slavery to be decided by
the people-it is right in another. Different de-
grees of latitude and longitude can make no kind
OF difference with the matter of right. Every
portion of our domain, in whatever cline, is the
common property Of all-and common sense and
common justice declare that the heirs of those