Des Arc citizen., 1860-10-03
HA lh Ga A rna 1ra-T- Srep7 7~e

 atc-a bill came up for the organizations of, the Territories of California, New Mexico and Oregon. After great difficulty and much excitement a com mittec of eight, four from the North and four from the South, raised to report a bill Chat would the conflicting and exciting elements. Mir. CLAYTON, of Delaware, was chairman of that committee, which after great labor at last agreed upona bill which was presei.ted to the Senate and is known us the Clayton-compromisc bill By it all questions of rghtIal jurisdiction were given to the territorial counsel; but, without the power to legisate on the subject of slavery, and 'Testing the right to introduce prohibit slavery in the territories IN THE CONSTITUTION, as Me same should De c2poadcd bg the judgeS with right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States"
 Many amendments were introduce to this bill, and it was on the consideration of t, that was had the memorable session which lasted twenty-two hours-at last the vote was taken on the question.s "shal the bill be cngrosscd, and read the third time" It was decided in the affirmative by thirty three ayes to twenty two noes--Mr. BELL voting in company wi.h CoRwIN, HALE, HAMIIN X Co.,, in the negatioc. [See Journal pago 503.
 During the debate pending the passage of this bill Mir. CLAYTON said; ''Me biH leaces the entire qti1stion achich is in dispute to the Judiciary.- There is no greqt principle sacrificed. ANy MAN WHO DESIRES DiscoRD WILL OPPOSE THE BILL; but he who does not desire to distract the country bya question merely political will be able by voting for this bill to refer the whole matter to the judi ciary.'
 The bill was satisfactory to the entire South, because it proposed to have the constitutional questions involved decided by the Supreme Court and the South did, nor does she nosr ask for anything but what sine is ceurty entittcd 10 under Hie Constaution. Even that great southern states man CALHOUN was satisfied with the provisions of the bill. He said in reply to the abolition argu- ment that {" the Constitution did not apply to the Territories:'
 ''Sir, there are some questions that do not admit of heightened discussion This is one of them.- The mere statement is sufficient to carry convc- ton with it, and am reoced to hear gentlemen ac- knowledge, by implication. ifnot by more than that that the extension of the Constitution of the United States to the Territories would be shield to the South, upon the questions in controversy between us and them.l l hold it to be the most important concession. It narrows the ground of controversy between us. We then cannot be deprived of oul equal participation in the Territories, without be ing deprived of the advantages and rights which the Constitution giyesus."
 ct MT. BELL, though sontherner, was opposed to conceding to the South, aay acknowledgment q her cqual right to participate and enjoy the common territory, but by his vote declared that the protect- ing @gis Of the Constitution did not extend to these territories-and yet his advocates claim that he is the only man upon whom the South can de- pend for her equal rights under the Constitution!
 
 sustained by the Supreme Court of the United States, and yet the opinions of Mir Bell are un- changed
 Notwithstanding the bill passed the Senate it was defeated in the House, the entire black repub lican abolition free soil vote, being cast against it.. In lieu of it the House passed bill for the terri torial government Of Oregon, containing the WII MOT PRovtso, and when it came to the Senate MT. BELL ADVOCATED ITS PASSAGE, but when the vote was taken he voted against it, on account, as he said at the time, 'of the eetngs of the friends oah aehom de associated' Congressional Globe, 1st sesslon, Both Cong. pages 1074-5.]
 But the bill passed and Mir. BELL afterwards, in a speech at Murfreesboro, in favor of Gen. TAYLOR wherein he reviewed his course upon the Oregon bill said "that he not willing defeat that bill by any direct vote, or movement on his part. He therefore voted against the proposition for post ponement. He aoas glad fhe biH had passed, as he believed its de(eat a0uld hare done naischief at ae North." He did not feel called upon to vote for it though he aeas not ceafty certain that Congress had not hte polrtr to dispose of the Who1e su9ect'
 Here Mr. BELL, co-operated with the abolition ists upon question of vital interest to the South, and ADVOCATED THE ADOPTION OF THE WiIMor PRo- vIso which goes to the full extent of what is asked by the whole abolition party, and in public speech in the South-in his native State, publicly pro- claimed that HE WAS GLAD THE BILL HAD PAssEp.-- And thus he has placed himself upon the record as the advocate of CONGRESSIONAL INTERVENTION, not to protect against malor unfrendly legislation as is demanded by the South, and nationa men every where, and warranted by the Costitution; but of intervention to FOREVER EXCLUDE the slave holder and slavery from territories.
 During the presidential canvass of Is1S, the peo- pie desired to know the opinions of General FAY the subj ect of slavery, and of the applica- tion of the Wilmot Proyiso to the newly acquired territories. Mir BELL in attempting to quiet their clamors said:
 'sI'hat he neither knew nor cared 10 knotc Gen. Taylor s views upon the subject.'
 And when told that the democratic candidate, Gen. CAss, was fully committed against the odious Wilmot Proviso, he said:
 "Sir his (Cass) objection to the Wilmot Pro- viso, being founded on HIS OPINION of what the Constitution authorized, and not upon any opinion favorable to the extension of slavery t tcoud hape been an act of unusual BOIDN ESS 10 hase declared thu he (CasS) aoould disregard Me former PRACTICE of the gorerganent and gipe no egh 10 he precedents Of Me MisSouri Compromise, AND THE OREGON TER RIroRIAL ACTS"
 Here we have clearly defined the course Mr. BELL will pursue, if elected, when taken in con nection with the fact that he s opposed 10 Me erer else o the eeto power with abolition Congress he woudaot only give them the aid of his sympathy, but the full benefit of his approval to any law they might pass: he,woud not be so bold ''as to disre- gard tke former practice Of the gosernmeatp as fore shadowed "ia the Oregon tcryitoriot acs," contain ing the Wimot Proviso.
 But if any doubt remains as to what would be his course; his line of policy is clearly defined in his speech 30th July, 1850, in which he fully ex- plains why he voted with the aboIitonists for the Wimot Proviso, on the Oregon bill---he said:
 ''Ihat the first questions connected with the new territory should be adjusted speedily possible and secondly that the ADJUSTMENT ,clen nude should De FINAL and IRREVOCABLE; for these reasons acas not satisfed eeah the Claytoa Compromise. J And consequently he advocated the amendment which did not submit the matter to the courts and the people; but which settled the matter FINALLY, by incorporating in it, the Witn,ot Pr0eiso, and thereby established precedent that would require more than ordinary "boldness, n future Presidents to disregard, in the settlement of OTHER TERRiTo- RIAL QUESTIONS in dU future time.
 In pursuing Mir BELLS record a little further it will appear that hough at present saiL9 under that banner he is moi snch il slickler for the