The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1857-09-26
TVT VIC -NtFtW
Democratic Nisruic.
NUMBER III.

Parties must be jud ed by their deeds, not
cratic party ever doae to entitle it to the con-
iidence of the country 2 The sO-called Dem
ocrats declare themselves in favor of Demo-
cratic Principles without saying what those
principles are. But their practices arc well
known. Let us advert to them. And first
", the great hobby Of the day-the Nebras-
ka Bill There are some facts connected with
that measure, showing that the Democracy
Of the North were driven to its adoption
which are not generally known.
It will be remembered that when the bill
was first reported to the Senate, nothing was
said about repeating the Missouri Comprom-
ise. A senator from kentucky suggested
some modification, whereupon the bill was
recomnitted to the Committee on Territo-
ries. of which Mr. DOUGLAS was and still is
chairman, in order that some provision might
be made to make the measure satisfactory to
the Kentucky senator and his friends. Down
to that moment, ii was not supposed they
would directly repeal the 'Compromise.
Re-. arrr.S ~. Of Missouri. who was then
President of the Senate, aware of DoUGLAs'
ambition, took advantage Of it, 10 have the
COMPROMISE repealed. He gees to him and
SAYS: " Now, DoUGLAs, here is a chance for
you to bind the South to you forever, and
become President of the United States, be-
yond doubt. Propose the repeal of the
COMPROMISED The proposition must be
made, and if you don't make it, will. Lut
had rather you would make it. The poi
teal strength in the South winch it will give
to the mover will do you good, as you are
already considered a candidate for the Presi-
dency, while it will be of no advantage to
me, as l am not thought of for that Office
Will you propose the repeal p
DOUGLAS asked twenty-four hours to con-
slider it, and at the end of that time declal ed
himself ready TO acccds to Mr.. ArcHIsoN's
request. Thus was the proposition brought
about.
But so fearful was the party Of the effect
so startling proposition would have upon
the Northern public mind, that they dared
not face their own music. They dared not
say directly ''the Missouri compromise is
hereby repealed > but they declared it had
been repealed by the compromise measures
Of 1850! What miserable shift for the
great ruling party of the county to be guilty
of! Now | venture the assertion that not a
single member of Congress who voted for the
measures of 1850, supposed for q moment
that they were repeating the Missouri Com
promise. Yet the Nebraska bill says in sub
stance that 4" The Missouri Compromise be-
ing inconsistent with the measures of 1850
is declared to be null and voidw Not dar-
ing to disobey the behcsts of the few South
erners who pressed the measure, and afraid
to offend the high sense of justice and honor
which they knew existed in the North they
by miserable subterfuge attempt to shift
responsibility on a previous Congress, who
never dreamed that they had been guilty Of
so monstrous wrong. They falsely declar-
ed that deed had been cone, which they
dared not do themselves had been done,
too, by a Congress in which CLAY, and WEB
sTER, and BENTON sat poor, ignorant men.
they knew not what they did and perhaps
the world would never have known but for
the discovery of STEPHEN A. DOUGLAS, four
years afterwards. 1t is We'll the discovery
was not made before CLAY and WEBSTER
died. for am sure they wonld not have died
happy had thev known what great outrage
they had committed.
The Democrats of 1854 cared nothing for
the measure except as means OF obtaining
Southern votes. The bill is discreditablc
r. 'he Statute book-it does not, in my opn-
ION. eve do what it pretends to do-in a
round about way, nulify the Missouri COM
promise. | subr,cit It to any respectable
lawyer t. say Whether bv the act Of 1854 the
Missouri, compromise was made Imperative
1t is, of cot Sc, immaterial whether it was
or not, since The public chose to consider it
repealed, AMI since the decision of the St-
preme Court, and only allude to the subject
TO show the duplicity of democratic leaders
and how prone they are to hambug the pub
lie. The point is this The act of 1854
Nebraska bil) declares that the proviso to
the sth section of the act of 1920 missouri
compromise) being inconsistent with the
measures of 1850 is therefore null and of no
effect. But suppose it should turn out that
there is no Inconsistency between the act OF
1920 and the acts of 1850. Is the compro-