The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1854-02-02
THE NATIONAL ERA WASHINGTON d. C.. FEBRUARY O. 1854

IHE MALI
Isaac N. Phelps; Walter r. Jones Jr; Oily
plants Sons; H. Meigs, Jr.; Leary & Co.: R.
NJ Blatchford; Joseph Lawrence; John No
Kesson; Taylor & Merrill; Z. d. Hurlbut &
Co.. Thomas r. Minturn; S. & T. Law
renee; Bowen s. McNamee; CIafin. Mellin,
& Co.; Merit Trimble Orsamus Bushnell !;
Robert Oracle; Charles P. Kirkland; F. c.
Tucker Buckley s. Co.; James L. Lord Chas.
Fl Marshall; j. B. Scterthwaite I. De Witt
J. L. Everitt; d. Codwise; Geo. NJ lawrence
c. 0. Halstead; Robert B. Mintlrn William
C. Sturges; Jos B. Collins; w. p. Atwater /;
E. Morrison Co.; and many others
NEBRASKA.
The report and bill of Senator Douglas, upon
the organization of Nebraska Territory, are a
challenge for the re-opening of the whole Sla-
very controversy, which cannot be declined.
This bill abrogafes the Missouri Compromise
celebrating the 36th degree of latitude as the
boundary of Slavery beyond Missouri, and sur
rendering everything the whole Continent be-
hind us, to Slavery. This is clearly breach
of the faith which was pledged at the time, of
the understanding ever since, and of all the
professions and pretensions by which tho Com
promises of 1850 were attempted to be justi-
fed. 1t is violation of both Platforms at
Baltimore, Democratic and Wing, and Of the
assurances given from and to all quarters that
the Slavery question was never to be deliber-
ately opened again, but that q full and final
adjustment had been made. IL is the most
baneful outrage yet attempted, and, if not Of
fectually resisted, will spread the bighting
curse of Slavery and Slavery politics over the
whole continent-Salem Mass Gazette.
THE NEBRASKA TERRITORIAL BILL.
This, then, is to be the new Administration
Platform. The door is to be thrown open for
Slavery to invade Free Territory! This is the
spirit of the Compromise, which was forever to
stop "agitation!n Very we'll, if Slavery can
afford to renew the war, Freedom will not
shrink from it. But the friends of the "pecu-
liar institution" should hesitate before throw
ing down the gauntlet There are mulhtudes
who are content to leave Slavery undisturbed
where il now exists, who would rebel against
any attempt to drive it upon free soil and it
argues bad generalship in those who desire the
of the "finality" of the Compro-
mise, to be the very first to violate it.-Albany
Eeening Journal
From the Worcester (Mass.) Pdlladiunl-a lead
ing Democratic Journal
NEBRASKA TERRITORY.
Nebraska lies north of SO degrees 80 minutes
Ind, being part of the Louisiana purchase, it
has been considered as guarded by the black |
line against the introduction of Slavery into it's
limits. But MIR. Douglass bill is considered as
,ubuersive Of the Missouri Compromise !; as Civ |
ing the sanction of Congress to the introduction |
Of Slavery into Nebraska; and as putting |
prohibition upon efforts that may be made to |
stay the spread of the slave institution over the
western section of the continent. We have not |
been accustomed to hold the Missouri Compro-
mise in such high estimation as have many
rom the fact that when State is once in the |
Union, if it chooses to establish Slavery in its
territory, we have never yet discovered the pro-
less by which the National Government can
resist Its action, or contravene it's determine
ion. But inasmuch as that Compromise was
ignifed with the appellation of I" q settlement
If the vexed question Of Slavery" there seemed
% be manifest propriety that the black line
should be preserved inviolate, like any other
bargain or compact. Missouri, lying north of
hat line, was admitted as State with Slavery;
hat was one end of the bargain and the other
was, that all the land lying west of Missouri
md north of the black line, should never be
CUuIStu Will DldVcry d6y dCtiOu VI
Congress. The North has kept its faith upon
Why the South should not hold true to its part of
he bargain.
The pretext for non-obssrvance of the OBJ
igations of the Law Of 1920 is, that the Com
promise Measures Of 1850 read usted the whole
matter of Slavery upon a new basis; and set
aside the Compromise of 1920, as no longer to
be of any avail. This is certainly an ingenious
to put upon the law Of 1850; for
while that bill was justly characterized as an
omnibus" no one pretended at the time that it
would override the Compromise Of 1920; or
n any manner impair its binding obligations,
whatever they might be. The discussions of
$50 were confined to the matters of California,
Utah, New Mexico, the Texan indemnity, and
he fugitive slave law. 1t was not then claimed
hat the black line was touched by the meas
lres of 1850; and it certainly has singular
aspect that those who were the originators of |
he Compromise of 1850, and the most rigid in
forcing upon the country a recognition of its
supremacy, are now among the foremost to tear
open again the whole subject, renew the agita-
hon. and preach that the Compromise of 1850
rendered the Compromise of 1920 a nulIity,
without any recuperative force. 1t is lesson
lpon Compromises which will be very likely to |
be remembered.
While we maintain that the Compromise of
1920 ought to be respected 50 far as relates to
whatever Of the Louisiana purchase lies north
Of the black line Of SO degrees and 80 minutes,
we admit that the proposition to permit new
States to form such Constitutions as they
please, COMFORTS with the views we have long
entertained in relation to State rights But
common honesty seems to us to demand that
the proposition shall apply, as it did in the case
Of California, to States erected upon territory
hat has been acquired by the Union since the
adjustment of the Louisiana purchase by the
Missouri Compromise.
From the Anzeiger of Jan. 10.