Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-08-08
FRIDAY, AUGUST 8, 1855.


expressly prohibits the existence of slavery in
any OF the territories of the United States
north ofthe line of SO deg 80 min. The re-
peal of that law by Congress was, therefore,
an acknowledgements that that body did not
possess the power under the constitution to le-
gislste upon the subject of slavery 10 the terri
tories. The Know Nothing platform aud Mr..
ilmore condemn the repeal of the Missouri
Restriction, which is tantamount TO ASSERT
ing that Congress docs possess this power.
Union and american.
Here is a fragment of the huge stone
which the SisyphuS of the Union and
american has been for months attempting
to tug up the mountain, but which invaria-
bly, tumbles back upon his luckless head.
1t heaves at its task again on yesterday
morning, and the above is an extract from
Its article attempting to prove Mr.. Fill
more unsound and unsafe for the South.
After a reference TO ourself as having dug
pit for Mr.. Fillmore; and several unfair
comparisons of extracts from Fillmore's
speeches with sentiments uttered by those
arch-freesoil traitors, nursed into political
existence by the democratic party, II Van
Buren, and j. c. Fremont, it takes the po-
sition assumed in the extract at the head
of this article: that to express disapproval
OF the repeal of The Missouri Compromise,
or to sustain that measure as just and
proper, is to favor the power of Congress
over the question of slavery in the terrific
rieS.
This is termed ''matter for grave consid-
Grafton on the part of every Southern
voter" and the opinion is expressed that if
elected President, Mr. Fillmore would not
veto bill restoring the Missouri Compro-
mise, but the article says there cannot be
doubt that, if elected, Mr.. Buchanan aoiH
veto any bill that might be passed to re-
store that restriction" We thiuk there is
considerable doubt on the point, and to
establish the grounds of that doubt" we
will call Mr.. Buchanan to the stand, and
condemn him out of his own mouth. From
the following extracts from his letters and
speeches it will be seen that Mr. Buchanan
has q Missouri restriction record equal, if
not superior in consistency, to any man in
the country. He has omitted no occasion
to let the people know the high estimate
he places on that measure. 1t will be seen
by his letter to Sanford too, that he boldly
announces that by supporting the Missouri
Compromise, he is committed to the doc.
trine of Congressional Sovereignty over
slavery in the territories. But to the teS-
timony.
On the oath Aug. lS47, writing to the
people of Berks county he said :
at is not for the descendants of either party
the present generation TO cancel this solemn
compact" that "under the Missouri Colnpro-
mise slavery was forever prohibited north of
SO deg 80 min, and in my
opinion the harmony Of the States and eDsn
the security Of the Union itself require that
the line Of the Missouri Compromise SHOULD
BE EXTENDED TO Any NEW TEE
PITORY WHICH WE NAY ACQUIRE
FROM MEXICO"
He offered sentiment at the close of his
letter as follows:
"The Missouri Compromise-its adoption in
1920 saved the Union from threat ened convul-
sion; ITS EXTENSION IN ls49 TO any new terri
tory which we may acquire will secure the
like happy result"
On the 25th April 1885 in the Senate Of
the United States he said
i 49,,
the exciting aud alarming circumstances under
which it was made aud the dangers to the ex
istence of the Union which il has removed, 10
be almost AS SACRED AZ A CONSTITUTIONAL PRO.
VISION"
On the 2lst August Is4S in a letter to
Sanford of Mobile he said
''Hauing urged the adoption Of the Missouri
ComprOmisS the inference is IRREsIsTABLR
THAT CONGRESS IN MY OPINION, POSSESSES THE
POWER TO LEeISLATE UPON TIE sUBJEoT OF
SLAVERY IN THK rERRITORIEs.-Whst al alb
surdIty would il then be, il, whilst asserting
this SOVEREIGN POWER IN CON
GRESS, Gohich p01ccr from the nature must be
EXCLUSIVE, / should in the very same
breath also claim this identical power ''for
the population of a Territory in an morgan
lied capacity"
"ln conclusion, desire 10 relterate aud re
affirm every sentiment contained in my Berks
county letter. cling 20 The Missouri Com
promise Nth greater toHdcity than eper, and
yet firmly 6elieps that n ViH Be adopted By
Congress"
In the spring of 1856, since the fruit
now ripening was in bloom, in letter to
Senator Slidel, he said
''The question has been settled by Congress,
and this settlement should be inhsxibly matt
tanned. The Missouri Compounds is gone,
and gone forever. Bur NO ASSAULT SHOULD
re MADE UPON THosR DEMOCRATS wHo MAIN
KID 1T, provided they are now willing IN good
faith 10 maintain the settlement rs IL exists.
Such An understanding is wise aud just in it.
self.
"Ir % WELL KNOWN HOW / LABoRKD IN
COMPANY WITH soUTnEES AKN TO HAVE THIs
LINE EXTENDED To THE PAomio"
And this is the position Of the man
whom the Union Gad AmericaH relies upon
to veto bill restoring the restriction
'qinep which "he labored in company with
Southern men to have extended 10 the Pa
ci6c ocean, this measure which in ls4s
he declared he cluug 10 "toith greater ts-
raeitg than ercr;" this compromise which DO
4at