The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-10-07


states, with the OF the American people. That All
spirit the acts Of 1920 and 1850 Shall be- made good in 1856
by the American peopeof the South let say well
civil that prevail in Kansas 10 DO lsgsa-
tioH required and not necessary thai s halls Coa-
election President the United States of simple views
and determined w who will the influence Of the gov
and allow the people country question
slavery for themselves there. We ask than this; and
in the grace of God shall and will succeed [great
applause the fact proclaimed that Fremont elect
ed Kansas DH be again restored TO freedom wihom Legislature
act, The ineeaee e the hand Of government ~ any ,oay
Mr. Banks does not propose to renew the Missouri Com
promise TO abolish slavery anywhere TO repeal
the law organizing Kansas to abolish the odions KAN
laws His friends attempted neither in either house Of
Congress. Why was neither proposed Simply because
they wished to do nothing which would alay agitation,
that would destroy the whole ground upon which they
STOOD and defeat the election Of Fremont This
for Mr. Washburn Of Illinois, opposing the Introduction OF
measure to repeal the Kansas laws complained of If
the Fremont men are sincere in their complaints why do
they not attempt TO remedy the evils of which they
plan2 Why does Mr. Blair wish to slavery where
exists Why does Mr. Banks say mo LEaIsLATcs is nE-
ouRED, NECESSARY THAT HALLS oy Cox
GREss when and his
friends devoted TO 1t through the session II the evils
complained Of flowed from the Kansas act how can they
be cured without legislation Mr. Banks wants that which
gave peace in 1920 and 1850 good with the consent
of the American people This easily Done and simply
by the slavery agitators abandoning their
and 1852 shall hereafter explain They have beang
upon the questions under consideration. With the
declarations have quoted and the omissions 20 attempt
change as to slavery feel authorized say that the
Fremont leaders wholly insncere and seek Office in
stead of fcurtailing aboshinS slavery any where
Colonel f'emonts Friends the only Persons attempting to
iegasiEe slavery By actef Congress.
Although Congress has prohibited slavery ncertan To-
caiite until the last session it attempted lcga
ze or extend it anywhere The Fremont at the last
session, by unanimous vote with excepon Of their
whole party voted to extend and perpetuate slavery in the
following words
service ~ either Of said Territories shall oe discharged
from such service by reason Of such rerea revival
said eighth secton if such person shall be permanently
removed from such Territory Territories prior to the first
day Of January eighteen hundred and fyeigh; any
male lawfully held service if like manner removed With
out sa Territories before the expiration date shall
any service might have had this act been pass
ed And propdd further, That any person lawfully held to
escaping into either e 7srritory Of Kansas or E5res
k may be reclaimed and removed to the person place
where such service DUE under law os the United
States which shall be in force upon the subiect
This the first attempt in Congress to sanction and e
galize slavery and emanaed from those who proiessedy
opposed it. 1t authorizes hodigg slaves in Nebraska as
well in Kansas until 1858 and permits all children born
OF slave mothers prior thereto be held perpeuay as
slaves whils 1t extends without limit the ugvesave
law These provisions voted for by tue Fremont
members and would have become law but for the oppos-
ton OF democratic Senate Is it possible that party
voting for such provisions opposed to the extension o
slavery The passing these provisions is incontestabe
proof that the Fremont partsans only opposed
10 slavery but that they willing sanction and per-
petuaie 1t where it does not exist The fact that no
effort made repeal the Kansas organic net or 10
annu in definite and distinct form, tho Objectionable
Kansas statutes is conclusive evidence that Fremont
partsans not anxious annul slavery are willing
should be extended and that all their clamor against
slavery is mere idle pretension intended for political effect
The conclusion drawn from such facts be averted
or denied but as irresistible demonstration itself
Ea
untruy alleged tina. the difficulties in Kansas cna-
nate from the repeal Of the Missouri Compromise provision
If this were so, the Nebraska act which u5atim the
that Of Kansas would have produced the same con-
sequences But peace and quiet dwell in Nebraska shile
crime reyes in Kansas drenching her soil in hum n blood
10 the disgrace Of our country. Kansas wod equal No.
braska n prosperity and happiness but r the acts of her
pretended friends which have cursd and stepped her ia
crime The disorders and ces in Kansas are the natural
consequences howlng n the acts OF her false friends who
have sacrificed her for personal and political consdera
tons.
The Missouri Compromise
1t is remarkable fact that every slavery agitation has
Immediately preceded a presidential election. Had that
growing Of the admission Of Missouri resulted In the
division and prostaton OF the democratic party Mr. Mon
would have been defeated in bis reelection This ag
iation was re ewed in ls3536, ls40 s44, and 1913;
abandoned in 1852 to be renewed in 1885, bat always sub
siding after the election. During the Missouri struggle
Congress provided that in the Louisiana purchas Of
that State slavery should not be permitted north Of
tain line Notwithstanding this when she actually
admitted in 1921 twothrds Of the northern members IN
the House voted in favor Of proposition make the ad-
mission conditional upon her toerang slavery Those
who sustained the socaod compromise and voted the
unconditional admission Of Missouri, denounced and
rejected their return home by their constituencies and
of the most splendid Of the North wee polii-
cllly prostrated by thus voting II here established
sacred compromise why thus early violated and
sauthors condemnedp II then no special vorte at
the North more than any other act Of Congress
In l84I, when abou. 10 acquire Mexican ter
riory Mr. Douglas moved 10 extend this line the Pa
cthcj but his motion voted down by l09 10 50. Mr.
GrahaTn of North Carolina renewed the proposition
which failed by l04 10 ST. The negative were main
" II not all, from the free States. The year Mr..
Douglas renewed bis proposition In the Senate the Ore
gop bill, which sustained by six from the free and
every vote from the slave States and carried by %
2 Among those who voted against the extension wsro
John 4. Hate HAALIN, and WILLIAM L. DAYTON, now
candidate for the vice presidency the Fremont ticket
This amendment defeated In the House hy O vote OF
l2l to s2every affirmative vote but being from the
free States IL this line sacred, wise healing,
and quieiing measure, why did those who now clanor
against its repeal refuse 10 extend IL our vast new ac
QUESTIONS II 36 deg 30 min. the agreed boundary
between slave and free territory, why did they refuse
10 declare In the form Of law Who was II that then
refused 10 recognise this line The South for H.
and nearly tho whole North against IL refusing TO extend
hssAyery barrier to three -four times It's original
length. Why claim to be the friends OF that line
The answer s that II is deemed useful element in the All.
tauons bearing upon the presidential election In 1919
the Fremont leaders wished for the like purpose OF
agitation to avoid the extension Of this line and thereby
deprive the South OF s advantages Then sacred
They then secured agitation, and divided the democratic
party at the North and illustrated their sincerity by elect
ing southern stakeholder for President This subject Il
now agitated TO produce like division Of the democracy
To