The star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1849-1866, 1857-09-23

otauuJ uCutCN pJ tuuuy WtsO u'etooaS"t ""~
not been directly tested prior 10 the late de-
cision.
The history of the renowned Proviso is
Rewritten in this speech, and Mr.. w. has
manifested special deligh, in exhibiting what
be considers the Inconsistencies oil the Dem.
ocrat,c party on this subject, and moie espe-
cially those of Gen. Cass, Hon. Richard Brod-
head and myself. He alleges in substance,
that if the General had voted before he re.
flectsd, he would have gone for the Proviso,
and ,ha, MIR. Brodhesd had said he would
vote for ii if offered to the proper bill, and
that had been very careful to record my
name IN the affirmative, when similar rei-
,in,ent passed the State Legislature. The
course Of General Cass and Mr.. Brodhead
ueeds no explanation or dsiencs q, my hands.
Their sentiments sre too well kaewn 10 iha
country 10 be successfully misrepresenred.-
And, indeed, admitting all tha, Mr. w. alleges,
do not see that he makes out any mans de.
struc,on. The wisesl men in the nation have
often been wrong in their first impressie re as
to the expediency Of suddenly proposed
measures, and to be mistaken on consliiu-
,ional question is no uncommon thing among
able lawyers. As 10 the Pennsylvania reso-
luton, il certainly did not receive that con-
sdefation 10 which it was entitled. do not
believe il was under consideration in the
Senate, exceeding a half hour before il pass
ed finally For myself knew bu, little abou,
i, until i, came from the House of Represent
s,ives, The day i, passed The Senate, and had
only thought Of il as an abslrac. sentiment
against the acquisition of territory, with the
view TO the extension Of Slavery and as ef
fecting the question Of peace with Mexico
AS a proposition involving The rights OF The
States, and the powers Of Congress, had a,
ha, time given it no thought Reflection
upon these things soon sfer, and long before
knew that Mr. Wilmot intended 10 press
The principle as admissible when applied 10
Territory which had been long previously &C.
quired by the common blood and treasure Of
all the States, wi,hou, any such original con-
diton, convinced my mind iha! its practical
operation would do injustice 10 the slave
holding States, and discarded its doctrines
entirely. Four years after the advent OF The
proviso, when The Democratic nominee for
Governor, l certainly was no: charged with
want of sympathy for the South. The re-.
verse was the constant allegations of my po-
litical enemies. The execution of The fugi.
tive slave law and The doctrine of non.inter-
.vention were topics in that contest, and ad-
vocaed the affirmative OF both on all occa
sions. Me. Wilmot himself publicly dissent
ed from my views on these points at a meet.
| ing in his own town where we stood face to
face. But it is Of liule moment whether
have been consisteR. or not. trust may
always be more ambitious 10 be right, and
never vain enough to pretend 10 great wis.
dom or forethough,. If | did not mistake the
! meaning of the proviso, when first proposed,
| certainly misunderstood ils author, for |
thought, him Democrat, and he has turned
ou, 10 be anything else. But has Mr.. w. re-.
lieved bis position by what he has said on
The point? If i, even be true that certain
Democrats inclined to favor The proviso be.
fore they discovered their wrong. he was no,
thereby warranted in sustaining it when the
Injustice Of the practical working had become
! appaIon> ~ A:.~---:~-s --d .s,.e~:.ily -:----
it has been shown to be unconstitutional.
But The candidate and his party are great
| on consistency. They are in the habit Of ar
raigning MIR. Buchanan, Judge Douglas, and
other Democratic Statesmen, on The charge
of Inconsistency, because a, one time they
sustained the policy of settling the slavery
question by geographical division, and have
since embraced The policy OF referring the
question 10 the people OF the territories, 10 be
settled as they may deem best, There is very
little sense and lsss patriotism in such crili.
cisms. The whole history Of the subject
shoxs tha, the controversy, at the different
| periods when the excitement attained 10 Q
dangerous height, was treated as . subjec, oi
compromise, implying at once The concession
Of principle and peculiar views. Statesmen
and patriots Ieh required 10 yield much in
The way of opinion, TO secure The peace oI
the country. Mr.. Buchanan favored the Ms.
souri line so long as the policy of settling The
| question by territorial division was maintsin
ed and Mr.. Douglas, in 1s4s, proposed to
extend the parallel o. iha, line 10 Pacific
Ocean as final adjustment, Of the dangerous
feud. But the very men who now, and since
1854, have no, ceased to bewail the aban-
donment Of this policy, were united in theil
opposition 10 It's extension and perpe,uity on
hat occasion. They repudia;ed it; secuted
and rsviled IT. Another mode of settlement
became absolutely necessary TO save the
county from civil war, and that of non-iuier
ven,ion, as now found in the Kansas law, wa:
wisely adopted in 1850 and is maiutaiued
by the statesmen have named. What in
consistency is there in such action. And
what is TO be said for the insincerity Of thost
who continued 10 deuouucc the Missour
line up to the time OF IFS repeal. The party
who in Connecticut bnrst James Lsnmsn il
effisy for voting for Il, and Isaac Toucy nea
the same spot, for voting to repeal j, and whS
labored 10 reject the principle in is4s. They
4 s.lk .k<