The Mississippi times. (Holly Springs, Marshall County, Miss.) 1853-18??, 1856-09-18
MIR. Buchanan on the Missouri
COMPROMISE,

Since the Democracy are finding so
much fault with Mr. Fillmore, because he
declared that he was opposed TO the re-
peal of the Missouri line, we would like
to call their attention to the following re
corded sentiments of James Buchanan, in
favor of that line, which they h~~s-rso
suddenly discovered was an outrageous
encroachment on the lights of the South.
On the Gath Aug. l847, writing to the
Epeople of Berks county, he said
at is not for the descendants of either
party of the present generation to cancel
this solemn compact" that under the
Missouri Compromise slavery was forey-
err prohibited North of SO deg 80 min,
and in my opinion tie harmony of The
States and even the security 0fMe Onion
itself, require that the line Of the Mis-.
souri, Compromise s iOULD BE EXTEN-
DED TO ANY NEW TERRITORY
WHICH WE MAY ACQUIRE FROM
MEXICO"
He offered sentiment at the close of
his letter as follows:
1.-THE Missouri Compromise--its adop-
ton in 1890 saved the Union from threat
ened CONFUSION; ITS EXTENSION IN 1913 to
any new territory which We may acquire,
will secure the like happy result"
On the 25th of April, in the Senate Of
the United States, he said:
"He regarded THIS COMPROMISE, con-
sidering the exciting and alarming cir
cumstances under which it was made, and
the dangers to the existence Of the Union
which it has removed, to be almost as sa-
cred as constitutional provision"
On the 2lst of August, l848, in let
ter to Sanford, of Mobile, he said:
"Having urgedMe adoption ofMe MIS-.
Souri Compromise, the inference is ire.
sistible that Congress in my opinion pos
sesses the power to legislate upon the
subject of slavery in the Territories.
What an absurdity would it then be il,
while asserting that SOVEREIGN POW
Err IN CONGRESS, whicA poorer its ma.
ture must be EXCLUSIVE, / should in
the very same breath also claim this
Identical power "for the population of
Territory in an unorganized capacity"
lin conclusion desire to reiterate and
reafirm every sentiment contained in my
3erks county letter, telling TO the Ms
souri, Compromise Nth greater tenacty than
evsr, and yet firmly believe haatsit 'siAI-5sa
adopted by Congress.
In the spring of 1866. since the fruit
now ripening was in bloom, in letter to
Senator Slidell, he said:
"The question has been settled by Con-
gress, and this settlement should be in
fiexibly maintained. The Missouri Com
promise is gone forever But no assault
should be made upon Democrats aoho main
tained Il. provided they are now willing in
good faith to maintain, the settlement as
il exists. Such an understanding is wise
and Just in itself.
n is UeH kuown how Ilabored IN com
pany Nth Southern men to have this line
extended to the Pacific"
Now, isn't he gloriously consistent
anti Missouri Compromise Democrat?
Opposed to the Compromise Measures in
1850, because he loved the Missouri Line
SO well and in favor the Compromise in
1856, because the Missouri line was anout
rage on the South" Glorious Democrat!
Most consistent politicisnll MI, BuCh
anan says in his letter to Mr. Slidell. mo
fault should be made upon Democrats who
maintained the lne." and the party are
following his advice but they do not fail
to lavish their abuse on Americans who
we're in favor Of maintaining It. Let the
Drmorrt ponder