Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1857-1858, 1857-05-26
MIR. He'll and Gem. zoIlIcoffer.


foundation, trying to get up the belief
that Gen. ZoLIIcoFFER, while in Congress,
poured broadside into the Bell party"
For this purpose, our neighbor quotes a
hasty report of a remark made by Gen.
ZoLucoFFER in the House, on the 10th of
January, 1856, whichreporqwasinaccurate
and was corrected by Gen. ZoLLcoFFER in
his place the next day; and then our neigh
Dor, with equal error, assumes that COL
BELLS opinion upon the constitutional ques-
ton touched upon, was in conflict with that
of Gen. ZoLLcoFFER, and that, therefore,
this was "broadside" poured by the lat
ter into the former, &c. This is simply ri
diculous-as we will proceed to show.
The remark attributed to Gen. ZoLLI-
GOLFER, and quoted by our neighbor, is as
follows.
"My opinion is that the advocates Of the eonst-
tutOnal power of Congress to prohibit slavery in
the Territories of the United States-ttongh they
may live an tie South, though they may profess to
be the advocates of the constitutional rights of the
SOuth-are doing to the South more damage and
are more dangerous, than the AboIitionists of the
North"
This was an inaccurate report of what he
said, and was, as we have said, promptly
corrected by him, the next day. In this
correction he said:
81 did not say that those gentlemen who con-
coded the constitutional power of Congress to pro-
bibit slavery, less patriotic than those who
construe the constitution as do. did not say they
were wosre enemies to the South. did not say,
that in my opinion the theory, that the Federal
Government has the right to act for the States to
be formed out of the territories of the Union, in
! framing their permanent domestic institutions, is
theory most dangerous to the South and the more
dang rous when entertained by gentlemen living in
| the SOUTH"
Again he said:
| 81 again repeat, and I wish to be properly IN.
understood, that this theory has done more damage,
and is more dangerous to the Constitutional rights
of the South, than the open efforts of the abolition
| lists"
Again:
''Ny conviction is that the theory that the Con.
gress of the United States has the constitutional
| power to draw geographical line through the pub
lie territories, and to say where slavery shall exist,
and where slavery shall be prohibited forever, is
theory giving to Congress power which the Con-
sututlon has never conferred upon this body. My
opinion is that this theory has done more damage
TO the constitutional rights of the Southern States OF
the Union, than the open warfare of abotonists
upon the institutions of the South. / do not mean
to be understood as saying, that gentlemen who en-
terrain this theory of the Constitution, are less pa
triotic than gentlemen who believe as do that the
position s and what wish to be understood as say
ing is that the theory is erroneous and most dan
gerous one"
These corrections were made in the run
ming debate with Mr.. STEPHENS, of Ca, on
the very day on which the remark was at
tributed to him and which our neighbor
now quotes.
But our neighbor assumes that Col BELL
is an "adrOcate Of the constitutional pO1Oer of
Congress to prohibit slavery in the terrific
ries," and that, therefore, there is an antag-
onism between him and Gen. ZILLICoFFER,
and that the latter, in this connection,
poured broadside into the ranks of" the
former This is another wide mistake
Col. BELL is not an advocate of the conSti-
tutional power of Congress to prohibit
slavery in the territories. He did not be-
lieve it expedient to repeal the Missouri
Compromise of 1920, for many reasons
which he then assigned, and which we gave
some weeks ago in our discussion of the
'Kansas-Nebraska issue;" he believed the
agitation and other evils which would fol-
low, would over-balance the good results
of that step. But as to the constitution
atty of the Missouri Compromise, brother
acts of Congress, prohibiting slavery in
the Territories, Mr., BELL has taken no
such position as that assigned to him by
our neighbor On the contrary, he said
in his speech in the Senate, on the Kan
sas-Nebraska bill, in 1854, speaking of the
Missouri Compromise:
"The power of Congress to impose perpetual
restriction upon slavery over any portion of the
territory of the United States was strongly ques-
toned at the time of the adoption OF the measure;
and locking at the question Of constitutional
pO,cer I agree nth my southern friends, that no
such po,cer be fairly deduced from any grant
in the constitution"
Again on another day he said:
GAS have already said not Tin this debate)
thought there rds no tCarant iN the constitution TO
authorize its passage. have said out OF Con-
gress, that if the South proper 20 make an is
sue upon this question, * should have been done
when the question came up in 1920"
There is, upon the constitutional point
no conflict between Col. Bell and Gen.
ZoLLIcoFFER and of course there was no
"broadside" other than in the distorted fam
cy Of our neighbor. In conclusion, we
would ask him if such attacks, FIRST upon
one then the other, such doubling and tack
ing about to avoid the true issues Of this
canvass, and which have lately character
lied his efforts to produce unkind feelings
among the friends Of Col BELL, Gen. ZoL-
ucoFFER, and Gen. QUARLEs are not "un-
worthy of paper generally so respecta-
table" as the Union d American
WAYNE CoUNTY'-We are glad to learn, as