The true Democrat., 1855-12-18
Short Arguments on the Nebraska
 


 following striking passage:
 ' He asked when did the anti Nebraska men fall in love with this compromise? They as serted that Henry Clay was the author of it. He quoted the disclaimer made by Mir. Clay in the Senate, in lo5O of the authorship of that compromise. He then gave it's history. In 1915, taking it in the spirit in which it was adopted to be applied indefinitely to all territory to be acquired by the United States, he had moved to attach 1t to the Texas annexation re- solutions. It was then adopted. In 194S, act ing again to carry it out in its original spirit and intention, he had moved to apply it to the territories acquired from Mexico. It was re- iected, and repudated by the north Every southern man voted for it, Northern members said it was wrong. They said it was digrace- ful to establish a black line across the Union south of which slayer was to be permitted: thus making 1t national institution, and se curing its existence south of that line by pa- tional legislation. They pronounced it infa- nous, ana not even to save the Union would they agree to It. No law was passed that year. On hlS return he found himself denounced for being Tn favor ot the infamous compromise, as 1t was called, just as he was now denounced for Its repeal. The abolitionists that year at Buffalo adopted platform in which they bold
 
 abolished everywhere in the territories of the United States north and south of that lne.- They did not think then of the faith of the nation being pledged to preserve forever the sacred compact The whig party nominated Gen. Taylor. In nearly all the northern States, particularly in Illinois, they pledged themselves to the extinction of slavery every. where in the territories of the United States. 'Everywhere,' he supposed, included north and south f36. 30. Did the whig party, when they voted under that pledge to blot it out, regard this compromise the sacred thing they now profess to believe it? The democratic party that same year nominated General Cass, who had just written his celebrated Nicholson letter in which he boldly declared that Congress had no right nor power to legislate upon slavery in the territories, and that the Missouri prohibition was unconstitutional and therefore void. With that declaration openly endorsed, the democratic party voted for Gen. CaSS.
 "Thus, in 1848, the north, in Congress re- pudiated the Missouri line, and all parties re- solved to blot it out The only difference that existed between them was, as to what should be put in place of 1t. The whig abolition par. ties resolved to replace it with general prohi- bitlon of slavery, while the democratic party
 
 what Is called squatter soveregnty-the right of the people to settle it for themselves. In every abolition paper were publsed, with heavy black lines around them, the words Stephen A. Douglas. the solitary exception, meaning that he was the only man in the country at the north in favor of that line Matters have changed since then. Now he was for its re- peal, and the aboliuonstS look upon that con- promise as sacred thing. They never got for It until he had changed against it. lie had never found one man who now was anti-Np- braska who in 1918 was in favor of the Mis- souri Compromise.
 IS. S Hays. Here is one
 Senator Douglas asked if the gentleman was in any way on the record in favor of it ? "S. 5. Hays answered that after the gentle. man got through he would show.
 Senator Douglas replied that, as he could not yield the stand, he would assume what tn gentlman said was true, and hereafter would give hlS name as the solitary exception. He thought that he was to some degree excuSable Tn supposlng Mr. Hayes to have been opposed m lS4S to the Missouri line because he knew that gentleman to have been Cass eector and to have made speeches all over the State in l840 in support of General Cass and the doctrines of that letter Laughter.
 $. $. Hayes. I am in favor of the doc urine of the Nicholson letter then and now
 Senator Douglas responded, that he did not understand how the gentleman could ad vo- clte Tn l848 and now the doctrine of the Nj cholson letter, which declared that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the terrto- res, and hence that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and void, and at the same time be m favor of that which was by that letter declared unconstitutional Loud cheers and laughter.
 Now, said Senator D., 1 hold that when the citizen of Illinois has done all he can to eradicate all the evil connected with our local matters, his political power will be exhausted Have we not enough of local matters in Cha cago to exhaust all our sympathy and phi lanthrophy without going abroad?
 It Is an old saying, that charity begins at home. Have we not enough to exhaust all our own charity in our own streets?
 A Voice. Go to Mississippi
 Without going to Mississippi, as that man says. Laughter and loud cheering. Did you ever know good neishbor to neglect his own business to meddle with his neighbor's affairs |? Show me man that will go to his neighbor's house and tell him how he shall eat and what he shall drink, and how his wife shall clothe herself and will show you man that is a HCoC OO sOCtC0S. lAIpIduSs II we Hlllu our own business we will have no trouble.
 Illinois had recently voted down a prohi- bitory law; Indiana had enacted one Would the people of Illinois allow the Indianians to enact such law for this State? Would the Indianians allow the people of Illinois to dic- tate to them what they should do? Kentucky had slaves; Illinois was free The people of Kentucky thought this State did very fool ish thing in prohibiting; we thought different ly. By that prohibition of slavery in this State he would forever stand firm. But when it was proposed to him to interfere with the matter in Kentucky his answer would be that it was none of his business.''
 The following is striking view of non-in- tervention from the same speech:
 q He cared not whether the intervention to defeat the popular will of the people of Kan sas came from Missouri, Massachusetts,, from Congress or elsewhere any intervention, every intervention, was a gross violation of the Ne braska act, and could not receive the sanction of any Nebraska man. Loud cheers It was the anti-N ebraska man alone who could not condemn an interference from without They claim that it is the right of some power outside of the territory to determine whether slavery shall go there or not. They, and they alone, declare that the people shall not be Jtee from interference from without. The lnterpo- sition of the Massachusetts Emigrant Aid So- cety, with their vauntlng and boastlng, and threatenings, and then of some men of Mis- sour following their example, was all wrong It was wrong in Massachusetts to send out men to vote. The men she sent out were not fitted for boider life; men who could not earn living at home were not men best fitted to explore the wilderness and reclaim the waste But they were not sent out as settlers; they were despatched to Kansas as political mercenares Why should not the people of Kansas make their own laws? Who were they? They were citizens from Now York, Illinois, Virgi- nia Kentucky, and Missouri. They were fit to be intrusted at home with the right of self government and could it be that they lost all their sense all their intelligence, while cross- ing the Missouri in a ferry-boat? Loud ap- plausel He then earnestly enforced the right