Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1857-02-13
FRIDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY ID, 1867.
GEN. RIVERS on TEE KAEsAs,EEBRAsKA ACT,

Hon. THOMAS RIVERS, representative in Con.
gress from the loh district in this State, has pub
lshed letter to his constituents, declining 8 70
election. A large part Of his letter is devoted to
defence Of the Kansas Nebraska sot, and Of bis
vote In its fsvor.-We copy an extract below,
with the single remark, that much mere spprO
pirate tins COR this defence would have bean due
ring the late canvass, when the very man for whom
Gen. RrvERs voted for Presi6sat was dsuouucing
the passage Of that act IS the opening a PApdO'
Tss box:
Il is to Be regretted that there was differences
of opinion between some Of M political friends
AID mysslf as to this measure. Toe views pub
Iioly expressed during the cabVaTS o. 1856 hope
10 Be able to show were not inOol s.stent with my
sntecedsnt opinions Duriny the CANVASS of 1856
my honorable and industrious competitor produced
the following record On ne:
At convention Of the wings Of Fayetts coun-
", Tenn, held at the town OF SomerVile, on the
second day OF April l549 - he convention having
been called for the purpose Of dominating dele
gales to a then approaching State convention, SD
John L. 1. Soeed being chairman, and Joseph R,
Mosby, Secretary The foilowIng resolutions were
introduced by Thomas Rrvela:
Resolved, Tnst We have seen with the most
painful interest the violent sction Of the north on
tie subject Of slavery, both in the Congress Of the
Uni o. States and IN primary assemblies Of her
re pie, which We can but regard as an unjust, uno
authorz ID, and unconstitutional Interference with
southern rgots, which, If persisted in, cannot,
ought not, ald will lot be tolerated by southern
men.
., Resolved That this Union is CO imposed Of free,
equal g independent sOVsigntlss, who are enti-
tied 70 foil ard eQus participation in any and oil
acquisitions Of foreign territory, whistler made by
force Of aims or treaty stlpuatlOns, and that EACH
and every citizen has the uEdOubted right to emf
crate TO such territory with his property Of any
EDeoleg whatsoever; snd that the passage by Con-
Press ofBny law restricting or IL any manner affect.
ing, this right, would be unjust affecting the equal
rights Of toe States and a palpable violation OF
the Constitution; and that in such event, it would
be the duty Of the south, if necessary, to employ
every means OF resistance.
"Essolvsd That We heartily approve Of the SEN
timsut and spirit of the late address Of the bon.
John O. Calhoun to the South on this subject.
"Reg0lged, That we think it expedient and prop
er that the people Of the savehodng States should
meet in primary sssemb les and express their views
on this importsnt and sgitstng question, especial
" since ther silence has been construed into in-
difference"
These resolutions were FeAd by my worthy op-
ponent ct nearly Bll cur appointments, and be and
many others can testify that I boldly and uuhnch-
ingly Ie5fismed the doctrines therein set forth,
and euGe67Ored 70 show that in endorsing the
twelfth section of the platform Of the American
party Wss rot inconsistent That the twelfth
section usithsF denied nor admitted the power OF
Congress to legslsie on the subject OF slavery il
the Territories, but had gone quite IS far on tie
subject Of slavery IS any OF the previous platforms
Of either The Wing or Democratic party. Also,
during the Same canvass / took open and decided
ground in favor Of the Kansas and Nebraska act.
During he whole If that exciting Struggle
never heard one single objection to ny course on
these questions. z Jon 9 careful and unprrjudiced
examination OF the provisions OF that act, Il will
be found Uaat the bill ITSELF II most Of its pTovi-
sions, Is inst and reasonable, Many have contour
ded the Northern construction with the trus mean
Gag Of the bill itseL IT, show that this is so,
quote that portion OF the sd section Of the bill
out OF which ali this controversy has arisen.
THAT the Constitution ana all laws of the Uni
ted States when are not locally applicable, shR Il
have tho same force and effect within Tie said
Territory Of Kansas as elsewhere within the Uni
ted States, except t0e 9Th section Of th5 act pre-
psrstOrY 70 the admission OF n ssOurI into the
Union approved March 9Th, 1920 which being
inconsistent with the principle CT nOn-IntsTyeDtOn
By Co. ssess with slavery ID the Ststes Or Terrific
RES as recognize by the legislation Of eighteen
hundred aud fifty, commonly called ths Compr0
mise measures, IS hereby declared imperative sDd
FOJ; { BENG the true intent e mesnIng Of this
set lot to legIsste slavery into any Territory OF
State nor to exclude 1t thtrsfrom, bat TO leave
the people thereof free to form and regulate T. cir
domestic Institutions IL tier owl way, subject
only 20 lhe Constitution If the United States;
provided that nothing herein contained shall be
construed to revive and put 10 force any law CT
regulation which may have existed prior 10 the
act of G h OF arch, 1920 either protecting, e.
tsbishing. pTohbIuDg, OF abolish ug slavery
Until settled by some hIgn judicial deCisi
every msu must 10 MS own Judge as to the tTue
meaning Of ID law, And ice mere fact tia
OtLeFs d e. T from him Ia the construction Of this
law ought not thereby to make him an opponent
Of II The tact that the Dem, crazy Of tbs North
or portion OF them, hold tbst under this law the
people Of tarrltOTy ~ s territorial capacity have
the right 10 exclude slavery from Kansas, does
not prove the dOcTu g to DO true
TEe crest objection urged against squstter
sovereignty u.s. that il is unjust and UnOonstitu-
ticnsl, and tic Kansas bill leaves the people
tLereCt free TO form and regulate their own DO
ID, stiC institutions in their own way, subject only
70 the Constitution OF the UCTei States, how
can it be maintained that squstter sovereignty is
the legitimate Cf,pung Of this bR Does the
Corstlu ion of the United States adthorizs the
people Of a Territory, IN a territorial capacity, to
exclude slavery flOm the TeTrtJrltS? Il answered
IN The stfrmsdve, then 10 ole can complain that
il may be found 10 the Kansas bill II answered
IN tLe negative, then sii must admit that It is not
in the bill
Again, the territorial legislature is crested by
COLgre.s; sUd il Congress does not possess The
poser ~ exclude sFe-y, Of course tue territorial
government cannot; because it derives its very e.
astsncs nd oil its power from Congress.
I think time has fully shown that all the trouo-
les 10 Kansas Sre more attributable to the msl-ad
minis ration of the sW on the part of the Exacu
tive and bis sppOiutees, and the wicked aud wlllul
DurP.ss Of Eu opposing party TO thwart the ca
torCemeut Of the Bw UseR
i will be Sc n that ia l949 denied the power
Of Congress 10 gIss on the subject Of slavery
~ The Territories and hence I could not believe
thar the Missouri compromise was operative and
binding,
Those who passed the Missouri compromise were
the wIssst and most patriotic statesmen; and could
l have believed that Congress had tho power,
should certainly have been unwilling to disturb 8
solemn compromise framed and brought into exist
euce to give peace and quiet to she c,uulry TIE |
simple ques ion Is this: Does Congress possess |
power 10 exclude slavery from the tsrritories2 If |
It does, then colcede tnst the Missouri compro-
mise ought never to have Ken repealed if not |
Ih en- It was imperative ard void The K nsas bill /
only declares it imperative ana void. At the 1
tine OF the passage Of the SJn section of the aCs
70 the admission of Missouri into the /
Um,n approved b March, 1920, there we're dit
iereuces Of SPIN on as 10 Jne power Of Congress 4
over tins subject IL vii be seen from the follow
ing letter Of n Msd8On to pr. Monroe, in 1929, .
what his views were: