New-York daily tribune., 1854-07-17
aCoTIES(ESCE.

and then near pap Va S'-NN
low here in the North trying to hatch himsen in'o ho
toriety BY expressing opposition to antsiavery sen'i'
,nents and recommending "acqulescence III the re-
neal Of the Missouri Compromise on the ground lna'
h.. is done cannot be undene or had better not Do
,,ao,e because Of the disturbance it will create.
on.o in great while this little squeak is heard
.t,orOh tbe columns of some intense Hunkar Whg
.ho.t On the part of some portion Of the bogus
Democratc press which resisted the repeal in ques-
ton and was apparently resoute in opposition to lt
"a the Turks at Sistria, we hear it oftener and IN
more distinct tones.
Now let us come at once to close quarters with this
idea of acquiescence in the repeal of the Missouri
COMPROMISE and see precisely what it means and
where it leads Kansas and Nebraska ere free terri
tory. This present Congress have legslated Slavery
into both The shareholders are making powerful
efforts to establish it there permanently, and will
labor day and night to succeed. Now suppose
BY dnt of persevering effort. backed by
revoyers or bowieknives they DO succeed in estab-
fishing slave Constitution for Kansas and Nebraska,
or for either of them. Do the men who suggest ac-
quiescence mean that those Territories are to be
quietly surrendered to Slavery and admitted into the
Union as slave States Is this what they mean by
acquiecence Or do they mean that if one, and not
both, should propose to come into the Union with
Constitution establishing Slavery that that one is to
be admitted This is question upon which the
people have not yet spoken, upon which Congress has
not yet voted, upon which northern Representatives
have not yet been called to express judgment. lis
question to be decided by Congress yet to be
elected, most probably by the Congress next to be
chosen Now We wish TO know of the bogus Demo
cratic journals and of the little feeble voices on the
Whig side which once in a great while talk of ac-
quescence whether they mean by it that Kansas and
Nebraska should be admitted slave Statesl This
is the practical question which covers the whole
ground, goes to the root of the matter, and which
must be answered yea or nay. The admission
of Ntbraska or Kansas as Stare State r0utd be the
ratification Of The rspcalng the Missouri Compromise
The rejection Of both or either on the ground OF
the establishment of Slavery therein, would be a
refusal TO ratify that act. Now desire to know OF
the men who talk about acquiescence, whether they
mean the ratification of the infamous act they have so
loudly condemned Do they mean to advocate the
admission of Kansas as slave State ifit comes with
slave Constitution This is the point for decision,
and the only one that is touched by the idea of acqu
escence. Let us have fair understanding aud no
dodging on this point And it is the proper question
to ask Of every man who is candidate for Congress
from the free States-Are you for or against the ad-
mission OF Kansas slave State should that Terri
tory either through fraud or violence, or any other
cause solicit admission with Constitution establish
ing Slavery Let no nominal Anti Nebraska man be
allowed to worm his way into Congress to cheat his
constituents and beray the cause of Freedom for the
want Of question like this to test his sincerity. Let
us have treachery this time. Let the line be drawn
between the man and the doughface. Ii dOughfaces
are to be elected let them be chosen such. If they
are the kind of cattle that any portion Of the people
want TO represent them, let them run and be known
in their true character Let every man be unmasked
and show the face at home that he intends to at
Washington.