The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-10-18
THE NATIONAL ERA: WASHINGTON D. c, OCTOBER 49, 1856

has since Joined the Pierce Democracy, moved
an amendment, directly repeating the Missouri
COMPROMISED which was opposed by the Wash
ington Union. But, the Propaganda were now
organized. They wanted the portion of Ne
brasks bordering on Missouri, for save-coloniza-
ton, and they determined to have it. Accord
ingly, Senator Douglas brought in substitute,
providing for the erection of two Territories,
Kansas and Nebraska-the boundaries of the
former being so defined, as to make it as much
as possible, geographically, continuation of
Missouri, and the repeal Of the Missouri Com
promise being expressly enacted-the very
measure announced in advance by that OBJ
scure Missouri paper! To this measure, the
President, as the country knows, and his De-
fence avows, gave his support, adopting it as a
measure of his Administration fact, as the
measure, adhesion to which was thenceforth
made test of party allegiance.
Now, he knew perfectly well, from the course
of the Propaganda, and from the bold delara-
tons of Mr.. Atchison and his Missouri organs,
that the one great object of the bill was, to
wrest from Freedom a Territory which had
been consecrated to it by solemn compact for
one-third of a century, and to subject it to Sla-
very. He knew, too, that no State Legislature,
no Convention of the People, no leading Press,
North or South, had demanded such measure
He knew that a simple, legitimate bill, for the
organization of Territorial Government, with
out the slightest reference to the subject of
Slavery, such as had passed the preceding
House with little opposition, and would have
gone through the Senate, had there been time,
would have succeeded in the thirty third Con-
gress, had he yielded to it his countenance and
support.
In rejecting, then, such a measure, and adopt
ing that of Mr.. Atchson, with a full knowledge
of its purpose and inevitable working, he adopt
ed the policy Of Slavery Ihopagamdism. This,
and not the principle of Popular Sovereignty,
was the controlling element of the bill.
In his Defence he finds it convenient to pass
in silence over this chapter of his responsibilities,
as an ally of the Slavery Propaganda. The Ter
ritories might have been organized without re.
pealing the Missouri Compromise: he knows
it; and, had they been, our country would have
been spared the disgrace of those Vandal out
RACES which now aflct our frontiers, and
threaten civil war. Why, then, did he repeal
the Compromise b? Why, but to give the Prop
uganda the privilege they had desired, of plant
ing Slavery in Kansas. And yet this man pre-
tends to be impartial and national, partisan
neither of the Ant-Slavery nor Pro-Slavery
party, neither of Missouri nor Massachusetts |
The bill itself was sectional measure, carried
by sectional majority, for sectional purposes.
Its object was, to take Kansas from Freedom,
give it to Slavery, and to aggrandize the
Slave Interest. The President who sanctioned
it, and makes it the measure of his Admins
tration, insults common sense when he claims
to be national, opposed equally to the sectional
fanaticism of North and South. That such a
Defence as we print above, should emanate
from such source, is not surprising.
Compelled by Public Sentiment to take some
notice of the outrages upon the rights Of voters
in Kansas, afraid to condemn them as they
deserve, and yet unable to justify them, the
President undertakes to find an apology for
them, in certain alleged proceedings of the
Abolititionists. So soon, he says, as the Kansas
bill became law, "the purpose was avowed
by the Abolitionists to defeat its great princi.
pie, by securing the hasty immigration into the
Territory, through the influence of capital, of
an Anti-Slauery population" This is false,
VIGOROUSLY false. The Indignation produced
by the passage of the bill was not confined to
the Abolitionists: the majority of the People
interested in settling Kansas with a free popu-
lation, were not Abolitionists," in the popu-
lar acceptation of the word. Again the per-
sons specially engaged in encouraging free i'm
migration into the Territory did not "avow
their purpose to defeat the principle of the bill"
nor did they cherish such a purpose. They
avowed their purpose to defeat the object of
the lave-colonization-by acting upon
its pr'ncipte-the right of the bona tide settlers
to determine its domestic institutions.
Now, admit what is not the fact, that East
ern men, organized in societies, paid premium
for Anti-Slavery emigrants, and transported
them free of cost to Kansas, for the purpose
OF becoming actual settlers, what law did they
violate, what right of shareholders, what part
of the Kansas bill? Might not similar socie-
ties have been organized in the South, for
for slave colonization? Shareholders were at
liberty to contest the ground by precisely those
means. The struggle would have been legit-
mate and peaceful. How could the operation
of such Eastern societies, carried on in the
way pointed out, justify the invasion of Kansas
by Missourians, not intending to settle there,
but for the purpose of taking possession of the
polls, and preventing the bona tide settlers from
recording at the ballot-box their will? In
other words, could the "hasty colonization"
of Anti-Slavery people, through the means of
capital" with a view to permanent settlement,
justify the armed interposition and fraudulent
voting of Missourians, retaining their residence
in Missouri, and with no purpose of changing it2
But, it is not true that the Emigration socie-
ties of the East offered premium to Anti
Slavery colonists, or transported them free of
cost. plain statement of the case will ex-
pose the gross misrepresentation and want of
candor of this Presidential Defence. The Kan
sas bill, as we have said, was framed to suit
Mr.. Atchison and the Propaganda, who had
svowed their purpose to plant Slavery in the
Territory. No sooner was it passed, than his
friends we're instructed how and where to To-
cate their claims, and measures were concocted
to obtain by means of temporary voters the
control of the polls. Conventions we're held
through all the western counties of Missouri,
for the purpose of raising money to make the
scheme effectual. The Pro-Slavery Party had