The Washington union., 1858-02-04


NON-INTERvE WHAT DOES 1T MEAN
The question Of the admission of Kansas into the
Union ia now fairly before Congress- 1t due then to
the subject that the principles of the act of 1854 and
all subsequent process edings should be fully exam
ined By the l4th section of that act Congress re-
pealed the act Of 1920, which is historically known
as the Missouri Compromise, q name which was ap-
piled to it because it undertook to divide the Terri
tories of the United States into two parts and to d
rect that north of the indicated line there should be
no slavery leaving the people the other side to
regulate their local institutions in their own way.
It was called the Missouri Compromise; it should
have been designated the Missouri Restriction for
it simply prohibited the people who might inhabit
the Territories north of the line from doing their
interest and wishes should dictate. 1t was a com
promise, however, in an individual sense it was
the adjustment of controversy between members
of the two branches of Congress- it was the settle
ment of personal quarrel by which the legislative
power of the government was invoked means.
II recognised for the first time in our political his
tory distinction North and distinction South. 1t
undertook to arrange moral controversy upon
ethics as divide orange, each party claiming
the while that the other rapacious in exac
ton and dishonest in faith. 1t created legal ine-
quality amongst citizens Of the country, giving
to the one freedom to do what it expressly denied to
the other leaving in normal condition, and
binding the other by arbitrary edct, all the moro
calling and uncomfortable because there was not a
shadow Of authority in the federal constitution to
Justify it,
As we have said Congress-, by the Kansas-N ebras-
ka act undertook to rotrace its steps by the repeal
of the Compromise. 1t was regarded a. unconsttu
tional by the democratic party It had grown dusty
in the statute-book never having had the vital pow
or Of practical application off living rule of govern
ment, is shown by the proceedings in California.
1t was monument of Weakness fossil Of the old
controversy Of 1920, sustained by pride and gnor-
ance and defended only by partisan zeal 1t
maintained by the democracy, throughout the memo
rable contest of 1854 that tho people of the Terri
tories ought be left perfectly free to establish and
regulate their own domestic institutions in their
way This popular. reasonable, and practical the
ory of government theory which disavowed the
rlgnu poncy OF ali foreign intervention which
sovereignty ty-was everywhere denounced by the re-
pubcans as unfaithful and fraudulent in inception,
agraran in purpose, and impossible in execution It
was declared to be the 6rst of series of con-
cessions to the slave States-the signal Of the
decline Of the North, and of the advance of the
South The line of 36 deg. 30 min. was a wall
which could neither be got over, got round, or
got out Of the way. The people could not be
trusted all honest reliance upon Congress and
upon federal laws The Compromise, nevertheless,
was repealed, and the repeating act was argumenta-
lively justified by a solemn declaration, contained
therein that the people Of the Territories then the
object Of legislation left perfectly free to es-
tabsh and regulate their own State institutions This
a and rule, law and justification. 1t un-
dertook to declare the doctrine Of nonintervention
and to apply that doctrine to two important Terrific
ries in which local governments to be estab-
lished and State governments anticipated. 1t under
took to say that in the work Of the latter the peo-
pie must do just they please subject only to the
constitution Of the United States. II was the mind
yourown-busneas policy. The republicans bitterly
assailed it we earnestly defended it. They beat
us by great odds in the elections of 1854, This gave
them courage and misled them into the belief that
their success was due their demands for the resto
ration of the old Compromise. Light broke in upon
us tho next year retrieved many of our losses.
Pennsylvania stood firm and pointed to her distin-
guished citizen occupying the very central tower
of strength amongst the forces of the democracy.
The republicans got frightened and changed their
issue from restoration to Kansasrom the theoreti-
| cal to the practical.
This change of programme demanded change Of
tactics A howl uttered against slavery II
was taken up and repeated often that we con-
| vinced there thousands who believed New
York and New England fearfully menaced by
the shareholders The non-voting system was adopt
ed because that essential to delay, mystery,
and prolongation of the dispute. The territorial
government was thus discredited and misrepresent-
ed-popular sovereignty was thus cheated Of sue
cess-the duty Of congressional dctation was thus
made clear and undoubted. 1t was the Pope's min
lister who said when assured Of the support Of pub
lie opinion Public opinion yes. sir, we make it
for expectation" So il was with republican
friends Never was there another such manufac-
tory of popular sentiment that which the republ
cans raised up in Kansas for and during the great
/ r.