Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1856-03-08
"KANsAs AND NEBRASKA BILL"

In the platform of principles, lately
published by the Know-nothng conven-
ton at Philadelphia, we find the repeal
of the Missouri Compromise, and the
sectional agitation arising therefrom,
enumerated among the causes of their
opposition to what they have been
pleased to call i" the reckless and unwise
policy of the present Administration.
This of course is direct reputation of
that great 5ulwark of the constitutional
rights and liberties of the South. known
as the Kansas and Nebraska Bill. We
say constitutional rights, for the South
has never asked for any rights save those
strictly guaranteed to her by the Con-
stitution. Opposition to this bill might
readily be expected from any party whose
ranks are headed by such fanatics as
BANKS, and WILSON; and we deem it
the highest compliment, that the policy
of the Administration should be marked
by these as reckless and unwise."
1t is our Intention, to endeavor to
prove that the Missouri Compromise was
repealed long before the present Ad-
ministration came into power, and that
the Kansas and Nebraska bill is nothing
more than continuation of the prin-
ciples proclaimed by the Compromise
measures in 1850, and that it is an as
sertion of the inestimable right of self
government, for which our fathers pledged
their lives, their fortunes, and their
sacred honor" in the times that . tried
mems souls" Here is the Kansas and
Nebraska bill:
THAT the Constitution, and all laws.
Of the United States which are not To-
cally inapplicable, shall have the same
force and effect within the said territory
Of Nebraska as elsewhere within the
United States: except the eighth sec
ton Of the act preparatory to the admis-
zion Of Missouri into the Union, ap-
proved March, 1920 which being neon
sistent with the principle of non-inter-
vention by Congress with slavery in the
States and Territories, as recognized by
the legislation 1850, Commonly called
the Compromise measures) is hereby
declared imperative and void-it being
the true intent and meaning of this act
not to legislate slavery into any Territory
or State, nor to exclude it thercfrom,
but to leave the people thereof perfectly
free to form and regulate their domestic
institutions in their own way, subject on
" to the Constitution of the United
States" etc.
In order to substantiate our position,
we must prove that the principles pro-
claimed in 1920, were antagonistical to
those acted upon in 1850, and generally
called the Compromise measures. If
they are antagonistical, of course the
Missouri Compromise was rendered "null
and void" What then was the Missou-
ri Compromise a! Here are the words :;
And in all that territory coded by
France to the United States, which lies
north OF $50 3ON, not included within the
limits of the State contemplated by this
act, slavery and Involuntary servitude,
otherwise than in the punishment of
crimes whereof the parties shall have
been duly convicted, shall be, and is,
hereby forever prohibited. l."
Here we see the citizens south of
3Go. 30' prohibited from carrying their
slaves north of that line to reside in the
territories belonging to the United
States, and of course the common proper
ty of all the States. Was this right?
Was it just? Was it expedient? Yet
the South, ever ardent to preserve the
harmony of the Union, submitted to it,
deeming it a measure calculated to pour
"oil on the troubled waters" The res
olution for the annexation of Texas in
1S45 contains the following provision:
New States of convenient size, not
exceeding fourth number, in addition to
said State of Texas, and having sufficient
population, may hereafter, by consent OF
said State, be formed out of the Territory
thereof, which shall be entitled to adj
mission under the provisions ofthe Fed
eral Constitution. And such States as
may be Termed out Of that portion of said
Territory, lying south of 800 .30/ North
Latitude, commonly known as the Mis-
souri, Compromise line shall be admitted
into the Union, with or without slavery,
as the people of each State asking per-
mission may desire. And in such State
or States, as shall be formed out of said
Territory, north of said Missouri Com
promise line, slavery or involuntary
servitude Except for crime) shall be
prohibited"
Here was the same odious restriction,
but we heard no complaint from the
South. In 1s4S we obtained large
amount ofterritory from Mexico lying on
Joib sides oft the line 800 30/, and when
it was proposed to extend the Missouri
line, what was the course Of the North
Sac rejected the proposition against the
united vote Of the South. And why did
Il i 80 poo,ueo tbo Conurouisa