Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1856-08-07
THE WILMOT PRoVIsO MEN OF 1850,
AND THE OPPONENTS OF THE KAN
SAS BILL In 1854.

4 ney are the Same--the men VINO lhrew the
country into agitation in lS4S-49-' 50-are
the men who now claim to be conservative in
having resisted the passage of the Kansas bill,
and in now insisting upon the restoration of
the Missouri Compromise line.
The Utah bill contains provisions of non
interference as stringent as those in the Kansas
bill. The whole of the territory lies north of
thirty-seven degrees north latitude Hence IL
lies entirely north efMe Missouri Compromise
line.
See what it provides:
"SEc. IL. And be IL further enacted, That
the Constitution and laws of the United States
are hereby extended over, and declared to be
in force in said Territory Of Utah, so far as the
same or any provisions thereof may be appli
cable.
SEC. !. = And when admitted as a
State, the said Territory or any portion of the
same, shall be received into the Union Nth or
,oittoW starery, as their constellation man pre-
scribe at the time Of their admission
SEC. .. ''Writs of error" y shall be
allowed, aud may be taken to the Supreme
Cnnrt 81 the United States" "where the
valn" q the property or the amount in contro-
vr.r shall exceed one thousand dol
iar. ,'.,i' Only that. in all cases, iarolying
title - s'pr~s &c sad wriis Of error or appeals
shall be allowed aud decided by the said S,r.
preme Court without regard" &C.; "and except.
ats, that writ Of error or appeal shall also
" allowed TO the Supreme Court Of the United
States, upon any writ Of habeds corpus. inuolu-
ing the question Of personal freedom" &c.
Now it will be observed that, by the force of
the terms used in the 9th section, question
involving personal freedom, or the status, or
condition of slavery, might arise and also
question between other persons than the slave
inrotcing the title to him. For clearly ques-
ton of the personal freedom of one where A
claims to be his slave, is not question involv
ing ttfe 10 starcS, but one merely to determine
if he be slave at all. The habeas corpus viii
test the condition Of one, claimed as slave.
but will never try title to him. A "case.n
involving title to slaves, presupposes the slavery
Of those the title to whom is in controversy.
Now this status of slavery, not prohibited.
but recognized in the terms of the law, and
sanctioned by the overspreading power of the
Federal Constitution, is further expressly as
alned, as possible fact in these Territories,
fg the provision, that they may be admitted
mo the Union, "with or without slavery, as
her constitution may prescribe at the time of
: admission"
Illus the Territorial legislation of 1850 meant
and was designed to produce equality of right
in the Territories between the two sections to
exclude every proviso of prohibition, and to
permit the people of the new States to decide
the question Of slavery as they pleased, and not
TO be prejudiced by their decision, when they
apply to be admitted into the Union.
Now, is not this the Kansas bill over again
Is not the Democratic platform an abstrac,
from the Utah and New Mexico bills of 1850
What, then, is the cause of all this agita
ton? Why should the compromise of 1850
give peace, and the Kansas bill Of 1854 pro-
duce agitation
The sincere friends Of peace in The country
Uere the supporters Of the Territorial bills IN
1850, and Of the Kansas Nebraska act in
1851
The enemies Of peace in the country pere the
bitter opponents Of Jothli
Look at the votes
The Northern Democrats who voted for the
Utah bill re-BradJry, Bright, Cdss, Dick
inson, Dodge Of Io'oa, Douglas, Felch, Jones,
Norris, Shields, and SturgeOn!l
Northern Whigs who voted for it. were
SoSEl
The whole South-Whigs and Democrats
voted for the bill, except Mr.. Rearce, of Mary
land, and Mr.. Bell, Of Tennessee.
The votes against it we're three Democrats.
(Northern,) Dodge, Of Wisconsin, Han.lin
and Walker
Northern Wings, and those now designated
as Black Republicans who voted against the
bill wefe-
Batdrin, Chase, Clark, Darts of Massa.
eiusetts, Dayton, E,oing, Green, Hale, Miller
Ssra'd, Smith, Upham, and Winthrop.
Those who voted for the Kansas bill we're
Northern DemocrdtS-Brodl.ead, Cass, Doug
tts, Got", Jones' Norris, Petit, Shields, Stuart.
Thompson, 7oucey, Weller, Williams. and
WaJh-(l4)
Northern Whigs-nonei
Southern Democrats and Wings. all bu,
Ben, Of Tennessee, and Clayton, Of Delaware.
Those who voted against the bill we're
Northern emocrats-Ailen, James, Hanalin
and Walker.
Northern Wings and Freesoilers-Flsh, Foot
Se,card, Wade, Chase, Gillette, and Sumner.
Thus it will be found, by comparison Of
the votes upon the two measures, that with
one or two exceptions the South and Northern
Democracy united to give peace to the Union
by spreading the banner Of an equal Constitu
ton over the Territories in 1850 and 1854
while the Northern Wings and Abol,ionists.
pihtout exception, agitated to destroy peace,
in opposing the compromise Of 1850, its appli
cation to Kansas in 1854, and in attempting to
substitute the proviso Of inequality for the law
Of justice and equality, sanctioned by the Con-
stitution.