New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-12-03


publicans Of being "ardently attached to Liberty in
" the abstract" be fires shot which they cannot
return. Neither in the abstract nor in the concrete
does be seem to cherish any more attachment to
Liberty than would have beftted any of the Tory
Governors Of our Revolutionary era, who might
have employed bis general line of argument with
very few adaptations Of phraseoloay.
Having broadly arraigned the Republicans as dig
loyal and trattorous, Mr.. Pierce turns short cor
Der and confidently believes that the great BODY
oftbem "are sincerely attached to the Constitution
land the Union" They will not thank him Tor
this supererogatory certificate of good Intentions
but despise alike the unfounded attack and the su
perfuous vindicaton.
1t is strange that Mr.. Gushing, or whoever was
the concocter Of this most discreditable Message,
should haze the hardihOod to ignre the agency OF
Jefferson, Washington, Dane, John Randolph, the
last Continental and first Federal Congress, In
resistance to the Extension Of Slavery and pretend
that the Missouri struggle of 1920 was the
first in which this question was involved. There Is
brazen hsrdihood, an absurd audscity, in this
mode Of treating q grave public question, In full
view of the fact that the whole subject has been
freshly discussed in almost every schoOlhouse OF the
those States. There are Half Million school-boys
to-day in those States who could unansVeraoly
convict the President of dishonest suppression OF
material facts on this bead. When q cause will not
bear statement of the whole truth, why cannot its
champions perceive the wisdom of silence
But Mr. Pierce proceeds to assume that the
Missouri Compact of lo20 was rendered void by
the Ieiusal of the North TO extend it to newly ac'
quiIed Territories in 1890. Is it possible that
any man can believe this Suppose two neighbors
to own tract in common, which they agree to d.
vide by certain arbitrary line, and their bargain
is soemDly ratified and recorded. Thirty years
afierward, they nc luire another tract lying just
beyond the former; and one Of them proposes that
this shall be di.ided as that was. "No," replies
the other; ~ stand by that bargain, but l do not
"choose to make another SUCH Then, says
the former, a. repudiate the first compact and
shall proceed to wrest from you your share OF the
"land divided under it," Is there court any
where that would sustain him in this course Is
there a lawyer beside Franklin Pierce, who could
be hired to appear as his advocate
Dir. Pierce decdes-against the authority OF
Washington and Jeferson-tbat Congress can i'm
pose no conditions on the States of the Union,
whether existing in the present Or in the future
only - and be says the Supreme Court has made a
similar decision. We do not know where to find
that decisiOn-bst no natter: We will presume
that the Court, as now constituted, would make
any decision that the interests or pretenslons OF
Slavery might require. Bat the question at issue
does not necessarily involve the power Of Congress
over States. Congress has power expressly con-
ferred on it to make all needful rules and regula
g tons respecting the Territory or other property
" Of The Cnion;" and one of the most "needfu "
il "Iule" which guarantees to every resident on
that Territory those rights to "life, liberty and
" the pursuit of happiness" which the Declaration
Of Independence declares "inalienable. That is
enough. Keep Slavery out Of the Territories, and
no question as to the right Of Congress to prohibit
it in States can ever arise.
But Mr.. Pierce protests that he cannot see why
the Missouri Compact was not repealabe like any
other statute. The reason simply is that the ad-
vantages guaranteed by it to one party had already
been realized, while those ac 'ruing to the other
we're just coming into view. The Save States in
1920 said to the Free Let us have Missouri as a
Slave State, and you may have all the Territory
North and West Of her for Free States" A few
Northern members assented TO the bargain, and it
was ratified. The South had her consideration
down; the North waited thirty-four years Tor most
Of hers. At the moment she put forth her hand to
taAe it, it was snatehed away by the Nebraska bill;
add now Mr. Pierce can't see why this Missouri
bargain should not be repealabe like any other
statute Suppose a man had bought farm oil
him for So, co., and, having fully secured the iArm'
should conclude to repudiate the bargain and not
pay the $4,000, could he see the iniquisy of that
But Mr.. Pierce proceeds TO wonder if Slave in
stitutions have such superior vitality and in-
herent vigor that they will always carry new Ter
ritory. in the absebce Of restriction. We ans yer,
that depends partly on position, partly on the laws.
A new Territory located just behind large and
D. pulous Slave State, and only accessible through
that State, with a large slayeholding and slave
population on the immediate border, stands very
strong cbsnce to be carried BY Slavery. Mr.. Cad.
" alsder Dcm.) Of Pa. argued in the House last
Winter that The very formation of Kansas proved
that ls trainers intended it for Slave State; and
pe think he was correct. But when 20 this is
added the assumption that any STAKEHOLDER may ca.
~ Slavery into the Territory in question, and that
no preponderance Of Free-State sentiment can be
rendered effective to shut or drive it out (Which is
the doctrine of nearly all the supporters of theme
brask abilN then we do no. see how Slavery be
kent ont Of any Territory unshi.lded therefrom BY