Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1857-05-22

We are told that Notwithstanding BIessrs. zoLLI-
ooFEEn and READg voted for the kansas Bin, and
Mr. BELE against ii that they we're all operated up
on. By the same inpelling motive. That they were
each governed BY the same enlightened purpose and
each adopted his course to attain the same end
namely the glory and happiness Of the South, the
perpetuity Of her institutions, and the security Of
her constitutional rights and that at the present
moment there is entire and perfect accord IN
their sentiments and sympathies. Mr.. BELL, as we
said, voted acted and spokeagainst the Kansas Bill,
and in the heat of that exciting contest he flung
down the gauntlet to ZOLLIooFFER and READY, who
opposed him, in the following magnanimous manner,
and in the words and figures following, tO-wit:
81 declare here to-day, that If my countrymen Of
Tennessee should declare against my COURSE on this
subject, tbe Kansas BILL and that shall be ascer-
tanned 10 a reasonable certainty will not be seen in
the Senate day afterwards"
ZoILcoFFER was difant, indignant, severe. He
took issue with the Southern dough faces " who
opposed this long delayed measure of simple justice
He denounced the opponents Of that bill as the
deadly enemies of the South" But listen to his
own words. In his speech in the House of Repre-
sentatiyes May 4th, 1854, he said:
" 1t cannot be that any portion of the South can
long cooperate with such DEADLY ENEMIES OF OUR
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS as viii compose the great
body Of those who win hereafter conduct the North
ern movements and man@uvres against the (Kansas)
bin
Mr. BELL was one of those in the South who con-
tnued to cooperate with the deadly enemies Of our
constitutional rights, in opposing the Kansas BILL
and now, forsOoh because we have succeeded in tr-
umphng over them by the decision Of this question
when submitted 70 the people, our opponents charge
that We in attempting to hold Mr.. BELL responsible
for his betrayal of the South, are rs-qgitatag the
question.
Upon another occasion Gen. ZoLLIooFFER poured
a broadside into the ranks of the BELL party. Mr..
BELL insisted that the Missouri restriction should
be continued upon the statute books. By that IN
constitutional measure Congress had assumed to ez-
Clude slavery from the Territories of the United
States According to Mr.. Bells views this was a
wholesome provision, and at all events should be
adhered to- What does Gen. ZOLLrCOFFER say upon
this subject? Read;
My opinion is that the advocates Of the oOnsti-
tutional power of Congress to prohibit slavery in the
Territories of the United States-thougk they MAJ
Ice IN the South, though they may profess to be the
advocates of the constitutional rights Of the South
are doing to the South damage and more dan
/ gsrous than the AbolitiOnists Of the North"
The dispute was carried before the high tribunal
of the people for decision Each appealed to his
countrymen. And in November last the verdict was
rendered. What was the result? Was BELL sus'
] tanned? Was the Kansas law approved by Mr.,
Bells 'countrymen of TENNESSEE" Let the
reader answer these questions for himself Did the
Hon Senator pledge himself to resign if his course
was disapprOved? See his own explicit language!
Did the people decide against him? Read their YER
dict rendered in the Presidential election and see
the admissions of the Know Nothing press that the
! people approve the Kansas bill Has he complied
with this voluntary promise? No. What is his ex.
/ cusei We are anxiOusly awaiting his response to
! the interrogatory.