The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-10-18
THE DEFENCE OF THE PREsIDEN'

| lately In the columns OF the w ashington niea
"Having made" says the writer, "the .naas
bill a measure of his Administration, and avirg
contributed what influence he could to i pas
sage, it would have been strange if he had ai.ed
to watch with deep solicitude every develo mt,nt
connected with the successful inauguratii Of a
measure which was designed to establish firm.
ly and forever, the principle of territori self
government, and, consequently, to gi, he
country repose on the Slavery question. gas
not only his interest, but his duty, to O serve
the prevalent feeling in the Southern States
respecting the efforts of Incorporated CON ,aties
in the free States to control the public SENTIMENT
OF Kansas by the influence of money an CAPT.
tai, as well as to observe the 'prevalef feel
ing in the Northern States respects the
outrages on the Kansas border He j. aw, as
every impartial man must have seen, ha. as
soon as the Kansas bill became law, t pur.
pose was avowed by Abolitionists to de.eat its
great principle by securing the hasty in niSra
into the Territory, through the influence If esp.
ital, of an AntiSlavery population.
"The Kansas law was based upon the pi nciple
of allowing the bona tide settlers-tht ,e who
came of their own accord-to find hon es and
to pursue their avocatiOns as permanent inhab.
itants, and with no preconceived purpose to af
feet the political complexion of the Territory
to allow such inhabitants to adopt OH reject
Slavery, as they might decide. The spirit and
object of the law were liable to be pt everted
and defeated in two ways the one by II mode
of hurrying in Anti.Slavery settlers, as hacged
upon the Abolitionists the other by tt mode
of attending the elections and controlling the
ballot-box by force, as charged upon ne Mis-
sourians. The former mode was as m ch cal
culated to excite and exasperate the outh as
the latter was the North. We have n doubt
1 hiatt L.
greet the excited feelings which have be n man.
ifested in both sections in connection itE the
occurrences in Kansas
| at is much to be lamented that the men in
both sections who give direction to pub &c Senti-
ment have not been more careful in To- king at
the different aspects in which Kansas affairs
present themselves. The editor of tn, Adper-
ttser is kind enough to volunteer his counsel to
the President, and yet he does not seem to have
qualified himself as a counsellor by ex thinning
both sides of the subject. Governor Re sder fell
into the same error when he returned 10 Penn
| sylvania, shortly after the elections in Kansas
In his speech to his neighbors at E, stop he
denounced with bitterness the viole &c. and
| force of the Missourians, but he wholly over
looked the conduct of the Massachusetts, Aboli-
| tionists, on which the Missourians has 81 their
plea of justification. In the late De uocratic
S0H'ChuVh az OyioCuoc, tuc cdIue cItOr WAS
committed-the cutrages charged ulian the
Missourians were strongly censured, but the in
reference of the Abolitionsts which had pro-
voked those outrages was entirely passed over
"Being actusted by no sectional feeling in this
matter, and being bound by his ofiicis ohliga
ton to know no North or South, but % carry
out the law In its true spirit and meai ding, the
President has not overlooked the embs rrassing
| circumstances which are connected With the
Kansas question, but, on the contrary, has been
| ready at all times to exert all the power vested
In him for the prevention of any Of those inter
ferences, whether by the influence OF capital
and money or by force and violence, which
are elleged to have been resorted to fer the de-
feat of the true meaning and principle O. the law
The Adcertiser will, therefore, see thai there is
not the slightest danger that the President will
give the Executive sanction to the illegal pro-
ceedings of Atchison and his coadutors inKan
| sas,' and thereby give an impulse to the Repub
lican movement which would render 1irresist-
ible in the free States. He has not, al he will
not, lend any countenance to any il~g&l pro-
ceeding, whether it originates in Nj sodri or
Massachusetts, which has for its obe tbe de-
feat of the great principle of allowin the in
habitants of Kansas to give an unbj lsed aud
free judgment upon the question VIII ,ther Sla.
very shall or shall not exist in the TIE 'sitory."
Let US bring to view few histor' sal facts,
overlooked in this Defence.
The Missouri Compromise was recc gnised as
in full force during the agitation of tie Slavery
Question in Congress in 1850. The arrange
ment then agreed upon in relation to erritorial
Government, was expressly confined + the Ter
ritories of Utah and New Mexico. \ obody in
timated then, or at the Baltimore Conventions
of the Democratic and Wing Parties, (which
sanctioned that arrangement, that it disturbed
or in any way affected the Missouri Cnmpro-
mise. At the last session of the thi ty4second
Congress, a bill to organize q Territ' rial Gov
eminent for Nebraska, defining its sseathern
boundary by the parallel of 36o 3O/ Sosh lati-
tude, was introduced in the House, wi opposed
by some Southern and few North srn mem
bers, on the ostensible ground that he rights
of the Indians were not respected, bu WIS pass
ed by an overwhelming majority. T e Slavery
Question was not named in connectit a with it.
1t went to the Senate, was brought at late
period of the session, resisted by sevI Nat South
ern Senators, and lost for want of tt ne, Had
there been plenty of time, it could save been
carried against the feebly-organized pposition.
Little was said about it during tb Interval,
except by the National Era, which e. posed the
secret influences that had defeated tn n easure,
and admonshed the friends of Freedom, that a
conspiracy would be organized by IL } opening
of the next Congress, to battle it, if ysia intro
duced.
Some time before the meeting of t esiirst ses-
sion of the thirty-third Congress, Sen to- Atchi-
son traversed various slaveholding Counties in
the State of Missouri, pointing out t them the
dangers which threatened "slave pr .perty"
from the organization of Nebrasks as a free
Territory, and doing all he could to mi st their
prejudices against that policy. He, or himself,
declared that he would never con enl to the
organization of Territorial Cover M, ent, I'M
less his constituents we're permitted 70 emigrate
to the Territory Nth their slares jim other
words, till the Missouri Compromis should be
abrogated. The project of repeal, end the divi-
sion of the Territory into two parts, vita a view
to throw Kansas directly under the nfrlence of
Missouri, and subject it to slave col3 iization,
was preached in an obscure Atchisln paper, in
Western Missouri, before it was br)s,ght for
ward in Congress. The bill, as frss IN reduced
by Senator Douglas, provided only TO-; ,5ne Ter
ritorial Government, and did not propose to re-
peal the Missouri Compromise, but te cave the
question of its validity to the Courts This bill
was sustained by the Washington :Csaion, on
that express ground, and, as the country had a
right to believe, by the Administration. But,
| it did not suit Mr. Atchison and the Propagan.