The Kansas herald of freedom., 1855-06-16
Opinions Of the Press.
The Kansas Excitement.

The Kansas Excitement.
Some of the Southern journals have
not failed to perceive that the late pro-
eeedings in Kansas Territory are likely
to prove seriously preiudicial to the in
terests of shareholders and the slavehold-
ing States while others, with fatality
that usually attends the movements of all
ultraists, persist in defending the course
of the Missouri mob. One would scarce
ly have supposed that a journal claiming
10 be especially national, protesting DEM
ocratic sentiments, located at the very
seat of government, and making its boast
that whether it be the organ of the Ad-
ministration or not, it coneurs in senti-
ment with the Chief Magistrate and his
adxisers-it would seem almost impos-
sible that a journal holding such posi-
ton and making such professions, could
have any sympathy with such perfectly
lawless proceedings, calculated as they
are to overthrow all authority of law and
undermine the most stable principles and
institutions of popular self-government.
Yet we find the Washington Union apol-
ogising forthese outrages after the fol-
lowing fashion
Having failed to defeat the Kansas
bill in Congress, the abolitionists resolved
to defeat its principle, and, by the aid of
incorporated wealth, to locate on the
Western border of Missouri community
of abolitionists who would forever sym
pathise in their fanatical sentiments with
the abolitionists of Massachusetts,. 1t
was a bold and daring scheme, by the
legislation, the money and the men of
Massachusetts, to defeat an act of Con-
gress which secured to the bona tide and
voluntary settlers in Kansas the right to
choose and establish their own institu-
tons. If the abolitionists of Massachu-
sets had organized an armed expedition
to move into Kansas, for the avowed pur-
pose of making it free soil state, they
would not have been guilty of a more
palpable violation of the true intent and
spirit of the law than they actually were
in their effort, by the use of incorporated
wealth, to import into the Territory such
abolitionists as would dedicate Kansas to
perpetual freesoilism.
'' 1t was this open attempt to plant a
colony of Massachusetts abolitionists on
the Western border of Missouri, that
aroused the indignation of the Mis-
sourians, and impelled them to adopt the
measures for counteracting the schemes
which have given rise to the prevailing
excitement. But for the movement of
the abolitionists, there is no good reason
to believe that the Missourians would
have interfered with the legitimate exc
cution of the Kansas law They were
provoked to measures of counter action
by a movement which threatened their
interests as well as the organic law of
the Territory. We do not maintain that
she measures rcsorted toby the Missou-
rians were legal or justifable-we depre-
cate them deeply-but at the same time
We are prepared to make much allowance
for their excuses, in view of the provo
cation of the abolitionists, and in view of
the deep interest which they had in the
result. While the.abolitionists- are seek
ing to revive sectional agitation BY in
fammatory denunciations of the Mis-
sourians, It becomes the true national
men, of all parties who love the Union
and desire its preservation, to bear in
mind that the abolitionists themselves are
responsible for committing the first of
tense, and this fact should be considered
in judging of the conduct of the Nilsson
rians, who are charged with obstructing
the right of suffrage in the late election"
Charged with obstructing," &c
That is decidedly cool. 1t is the loud,
Wanting boast of the MissouriaHs them
selves, that for that very purpose they
entered the Territory, and that, by rio-
lence unparalleled in any free or civilized
country, they effected their determined
purpose. Nor would it be any justi6ca-
ton or palliation of their conduct, had
the Union allegations against the friends
of freedom been. true Two wrongs
never make right. Besides there is
most palpable difference of degree m the
amount Of wrong doing. even supposing
the Freesoilers had done the wrong at
tributed to them. There is no pretense
that the Free Soil party in the slightest
degree sought to obstruct the right of
suffrage by violence, or in armed bodies
sought to drive from the territory any
shareholders who had settled there, or
destroyed property, or threatened life, or
by any mode of intimidation sought to
deter their Southern fellow citizens from
residing there. Of these enormities the
Missourian Pro-Slayery men alone were
guilty. The Free Soil settlers in Kansas
Territory were peaceable, and sought
their rights only at the ballot box. There
cen be no parallel drawn between the
parties. The Free Sellers were in fact
national; the Pro-Slayery men intensely
sectional.
But the allegations against tire settlers
from the North and East are not true.
And it is entirely new doctrine that the
settlement of a Territory by the aid of
the combination of
number Of men to assist with money and
counsel those of their fellow citizens who
desire 10 semigrate 10 a new Territory,
but are too poor to carry ont their wishes
lis an cffense against our constitution
and laws, IN any measure, but especially
in an equal degree with " organizing an
armed force y % take possession OF such
Territory. The Washington Union can
not show koso such an association could
" defeat an act Of Congress, which Sc