The daily union., 1854-02-03

ern men, seed the threatening controversy then existing
on those principles.
No serious collision between northern and southern esl-
Ing subsequently, arose until extensive acquisitions Of
new territory from Mexico. hen portion OF northern
sentiment was unwilling practically carry the prn-
cipes OF the Missouri Compromise and leave the people
the Territories south Of the compromise line determine
for themselves the question OF tbs institution of savey
among them. The subject underwent the thorough
aud examination lor three four years prior 10
1850 and statesmen and indeed persons who
take interest In political affairs. formed decided opn-
ions.
The result was, that in the measures known the
eompromise acts passed in 1850, the principle that the
people OF the locality should determine for themselves
whether they would establish prohibit slavery was very
EN- phuicay ined There has been general dispo-
ston manifested among those who were opposed to
legislation question, 10 aequesce In the decision
hus arrived at and regard t the whole, fortunate
settlement OF controversy which If continued would peri
odcay endaDger the safety OF the Union.
In the bills pending IN Congress to establish terrific
rial governments In Nebraska and Kansas, the principe
hat the existence prohibition OF slavery shall be len
entirely and exclusively 10 the decision OF the people OF
The Territories. we durng their territorial probation
when they shall organize State government Is fully
ognsed and carried into effect Indeed The only ohec-
ton urged is that this principle is carried oat 10 literally
override that part OF the Missouri Compromise which
prohibits slavery nor, Of 80 deg 80 min Ia our territorial
domain up The time OF its erection into States
Now we certainly have objection TO the continuance
Of the Missouri Compromise prohibition IN the Territory in
question The efectua prevention OF slavery accords
with all feelings and principles, and we rejoice over
every ia the road towards human freedom Prac
caly applicable the proposed Territories OF Nebas
ka aud Kansas do regard legislation In this matter
important There is the slightest probability that either
Of these Territories viii become slave States They
will be settled by hardy enerprising population, whose
genius will not accord with the Institution of African
slavery and who VIII that any such incubus
shall rest upon their young and growing States.
We unable, however, TO resist the concusion forced
upon by convictions growing of careful and
attention this subject during the many years Of its
agitation, thai the ruehe only rule with
national safety under conflicting ntefess-is to
slavery entirely local institution, and leave
i do all questions Of local legislation, the dis
is particularly interested in its existence or prohibi-
| ton. This takes the question of national le-
gsation. Ii relieves from constantly rec urrng
of ntation. Ii settles question which, from the
the and from its sectional character be
settled by Congress without shock national
government This disposition OF the matter Is according
TO the theory of constitution and laws We leave all
other domestic qnesiions-eyerythng reising social
der the organic abo and all questions OF personal
ibeny--to the State AID territorial Why
should this belong the Iafsd;ctoa Neither
the ineress of our county any portion of il,
nor those OF humanity, require that generai govern
ment should seek draw this question: with all its diff
cutes dangers within its sphere Of action. Let
pose where esiinately belongs and let the country