The daily union., 1856-10-18
From the Pennsylvania.
THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE.
LA PIERRE HOUSE,

Philadelphia, October A. 1856.
To the Editors Of The Pennsylpanian:
GENTLEMEN believe that many of the patriotic,
conservative and Unonloving citizens of the northern
States entertain the opinion that the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise line not only wrong in ITSELF but breach
of compact and of faith the part of the South towards
the North. viii you be courteous enough to allow me
briefly TO express my views in your patriotic journal the
subject southern conservative and Union prems-
ing and promising that my object not controversy but
simply the case and for ALL in your columns
presents itself my mind and to the southern mind
generallyf
We of the South hold that the Louisiana territory was
ceded TO the United States by France a savehoding
territory and received such by the United States with
and under treaty stipulation that the territory should be
formed into States its population should
rant and that the States formed should be admitted
into the Union footing of equality with the original
States; that under this treaty the State Of louisiana
part of the ceded territory admitted into the Union
saveholding State that when Missouri another part
of the territory applied for admission into the Union
with slavery clause in her constitution, she for
long time denied her request in consequence of that
clause in derogaon of her rights both under the treaty
of cession and under the constitution Of the United
States and she only finally admitted and then with
difficulty and with much northern opposition under what
called the Missouri Compromise by which stp
uaed that in the residue of the Louisiana territory sa
very should be nterdiced north Of 80 deg 80 min north
latitude and that slavery should be permitted or interdic
ed the portion Of the territory lying south of that line
cordingy the people thereof should determine that
this compromise although assented by the southern
States and chiefly carried by their votes-so far as It alb
souey nterdcted slavery in any portion Of the terrific
ry-was unconstitutional null, and void and directly in
the teeth Of the treaty Of oession that by Of ths
unconstitutional compromise territory originally acquired
aud received as savehodng territory converted
free territory well in breach Of treaty faith as Of the
constitution that this compromise was passed by the
Of all the southern States and by n minority Of
northern votes, which, in combination, constituted ma
oy Of in both branches of Congress that the South
faithfully adhered 10 this compromise and sought but
sought In van extend II TO the other territory Of the
Union outside Of the Louisiana purchase that under IL
Arkansas with much northern opposition was admit
ted into the Union as a slavehoding State and Iowa
without difficulty opposition, a free State and the
Territory Of Minnesota settled and organized for
future admission in the like charscter-to say moth
ing Of both Oregon and Washington Territories which
also settled and organized for admission In the
like character, and which many hold or contend 10
have been included in the Louisiana purchase that the
North, non-saveholdng States were always restve
under this compromise and actually turned ont Of Con-
gress all nearly ALL OF the northern members who vo-
ted for 1t that the South the contrary satisfied 10
abide by 1t orsp, and proposed again and again (ony
rejection from the North to extend the compro
mise to the Pacific ocean, regarding and respecting as
binding compact although Of at least questionable const
tutionay and validity that senator from a nonslave-
holding State proposed the sbrognon Of the line and Of
the compact and its substitution by new compact per
mng nterdctng slavery in the residue Of the Louis
lana purchase, the people thereof should determine
that the South sssentcd this arrangement and Il wes
carried by the OF all the southern States and Of
nearly all the northern and non-saveholdug democratic
votes in Congress that the old compact was thus abro-
gated annued and the adopted precisely as
the old compact had been adopednamey by a majority
Of in both branches Of Congress- that majority being
formed by all, nearly all, the votes from the
slaveholding States, and by plurality Of the votes
from the non-slavehodiug States, In both branches
Of Congress that II Congress had constitutional power
to form the old compact (which Is debateabe II GER
tanly had the like power sbrogate or annul it that
In oil this there breach Of compact or violation
OF faith the part OF the South towards the North but
merely and simply the sbrogaton or npnulment of com
pact between the North and South by mutual copsent and
In the same manner that the compact had been
made that this sbrogaton annulment no moro
breach Of compact between the States making It or be-
tween the North and South than would be the
or escson Of any covenant agreement between ndivd
nails nations by mutual consents that under the old
compact while II existed the South gained or rather re-
fained Missouri and Arkansas and the North has oain,d
Iowa and viii doubtless Minnesota and Nebraska
TO say nothing Of Oregon and Washing onthe lions share
OF the debsteabe andwhe the South may possibly re-
gain Kansas the North however having an equal
for III that IN addition to all this outside of the Louisiana
purchase (besides Oregon and Washington about which
there s dispute already ntmated the North has gain
ed California and will Utah and New Mexico Will.
the South has gained acquired Florida and Texas that
under the ordinance Of 1891 1.-THE voluntary and generous
and nnrequited cession Of Virginia savehodinQ State
the North has acquired Ohio Indiana Illinois Michigan