The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-08-26
WASHINGTON CITY,
WHO VIOLATED THE MISSOURI RESTRICTION ?

SUNDAY MORNING. AUGUST 20, 1865.
WHO VIOLATED THE MISSOURI RESTRICTIONS
For thyhree long years the most odious thing to the
abolonss and their followers has been the soealled
Missouri Compromise. During all this period of time It
has been the ready apparon paraded before the country
whenever northern citizen uttered sentiment favorable
to the rights of the States Deposm had never enacted
graver despotism Tyranny had never fashioned Sc
tyranny II faint upon the statue-book that
seemed in its poisonous qualities as years passed
on corrupting the like plague and dishonor-
ing the name of liberty the remotes generations Every
northern statesman that had defended it was to be damned
beyond all redemption; and woe unto all those OF mod
ern times who dared go back to the Missouri Compro-
mise as remedy for existing troubles We need only al
ude to the sandes that heaped upon James Buchnn-
an and Stephen al Douglas when those eminent northern
democrats proposed the Missouri line the basis
Of adjustment dung the discussions in Congress upon the
Mexican acquisitions.
But live to lSarn and aboonism is stern teacher
of Generalization 70 free people In an inconceivaby
short space of time this whole current of luminosity to the
Missouri line arrested and turned back The shame
full and shameless act Of perfdythe Missouri Compro-
iseis suddenly elevated into sacred and intalble
institution by the opposition to the democratic party The
ereedemagogues that have execred il as piece OF unpar
aleled iny and have pointed it out plaguespo that
tainted our satutebooks and disgraced history sud
denly las by process unknown to naure pros
themselves before it, and declare 1t to be the nobest
invention of patriotism and the inseparabe barrier to
southern aggression The Sarnian philosophy of the
transmigration of souls is renewed upon happy
chores and the changes are alike extraordinary and
numerous No attempt is made to defend this amazing
transformation The disciples who yesterday reved the
~ nf,, chaI trpo-
son to-day worship it almost emanation from the
Deity as sacred the touch of roane innovation as
the Decalogue ITSELF
This of fragrant Inconsistency must not be forgotten
in approaching the question: Who violated the Missouri
restriction ~ For this inconsistency shows beyond con-
tradcton character of the opposition to the egs
laon of 1920 and 1921 and exposes at the time the
wicked recklessness of the opposition now banded
in common cause in defence of measure which THEY
THEMSELVES HAVE MOST CONTRIBUTED AND TO
DESTROY.
whea the Nebraska bill was introduced Congress in
1854 the Missouri Compromise dead letter upon the
satue-book Enacted and understood solemn
between the North and the South far any act bind
ing upon the future be regardedan assumption
utterly deny-it constantly and violently repudated
by majority of the northern States by their local
and this from 1921 down to 1854 To oberae it from the
statutebooks, therefore, to corpse from
living and healthy connexion was, in word, to de-
clare that the ruins great measure which had been
broken down by northern action should be removed from
the path of legislation Such the effect of the Nebraska
bill SO far as the acts of 1920 and 1921 concerned.
Having thus shown that the Missouri Compromise of
1920 has been dsregaded for thrythree years by the
North until it became dead weight, lifeless burden
upon statuebooks let show the process by
which was destroyed by the North before repealed
by Congress.
The idea that Mr. Clay originated the Missouri Compro-
mise is a fallacy thousand times exposed He did not
for it. 1t offered by Mr. Thomas senator
from Illinois. This the Compromise Of ls20the act
upon which, after thrtyve years refusal to recognise it,
the aboonss rely in their upon the democratic
party. This act rather the eighth section Of this act
prohibiting slavery north of the line SO deg 80 mn and
allowing it south of that line mere law of Congress
unconstitutional in its attempt bind the future by the
present, and has been treated from the beginning
by the northern States Missouri not party to
this act 1t was it is true, condition her admission
affixed by Congress- hut to which she could be party
because disposed of territory outside of her limits But
proceed After the passage Of the act of 1920 Missouri
framed her Stateconsution and demanded admssonint
the American Union This t,oeve months after the enact
ment of The falsely called Missouri Compromise the
Congress that enacted that compromise refused northern
gotes aliow Missouri 10 the Union upon the
provided by that Congress ITSELF Recoect Missouri had
obeyed the act Of 1920 nosiy adhered to by the
northern abolitoniss She accepted the conditions offered
to her by that and yet her application to in
under these very conditions the NORTH mass roted against
her admission The stood 10 for her admission SO
against it the latter being solid northern cote The pre-
text for this first violation Of the Missouri Compromise by
tho northern in Congress assembled because
The people of Missouri had incorporated into their con
stution clause prohibiting e introduction Of free negroes
Although Massachusetts, at that very time had similar
law in force upon her stautebooks, (as other
States have at the present day. this the prert upon
which the North refused admit Missouri Then it was
That Mr.. Clay came forward with the following PROPOSE
uon, upon which Missouri finally admitted
resolution providing for the of Missouri into the
Union on a certain condition.
Reopedbyshe Senate and House U
go MsaGs u! csagrsa
nal States in all respects whatever upon the fundamental
don that the fourth clause the twenty sixth section of the
third article OF the constitution submitted the part of
said State Congress- shall be construed authorize
the passage any law and that law shall be passed in
conformity hore by which any citizen Of either Of the
States shall be excluded the enjoyment