Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1860-1862, 1860-08-25
MIR. uen and the Question of SLAVERY.

the y. I IYTbhlIfe- anu ctDct ~ phohOaH j'di-
mails. are engaged IN an effort to prejudice
the people of the North against him, on ac-
count of bis views upon the subject Of sla-
very. which are the aRtipOdes of those geUer-
ally held in that section of the Union. The
TiG,,He goes so far as TO charge him with
completely in the repeal of the Missouri re-
strution,-be having voted TO place in the
Kansas-Nebraska bill the clause repeating it.
and with voting on other amendments in
such way as TO show his Partially for the in-
stitution of slavery, and then declares that
bis vote against the bill does not exempt him
from the responsibility of having given the
votes which, in its eyes, are reprehensihle.
The st. Louis Denocr0t, the old organ OF the
democracy of Missouri, now supporting the
Republican ticket, turns its batteries up7n
Mr. BELL also. On the 18th inst. in an
article under the caption of ''BEIL's Position
on The SlaUTy Question: it says:
The result of the Kentucky election, aud
the impulse thereby given to the Bell and
Everett movement, render il proper that the
opinions of Bell on the sIsyeTy question
should be fully and correctly made known to
the public. Nor is this difficult task. He
has served in Congress and Cabinets; he par
ticipated in the great controversies of ;50-'j4.
His record Is therefore extensive, and, judg-
ing from letter of his, recently written and
published, he refers TO it with pride. and con-
fidently invites its inspection. We think it
will be found, on examination, that he is a
decided pro-slavery man that his opinions
on the slavery question are Identical with
those professed by the Breckenridge Demo-
cracy. and not at all with those which were
held by Clay and the Wing party. True, he
is not an agitatOr of that question, and that
is the sole difference in the premises between
him and the Southern Democracy. Neither
does he countenance disunion, nor treason OF
any kind. His policy is to protect and ex-
tend slavery within the Union, without con-
templating the alternative of secession IN the
event of that policy being frustrated.
The protection aud extension of slavery
within the Union is the platform on which
John Bells record establishes him. In the
great debate on the compromise measures OF
1850, he argued that slavery is right in itself
and benefcent in its operations and results;
that the powers ana resources OF the Conted-
cracy woald not be half what they are, eX-
cept for slave labor; and tina; the institution
is i'm harmony with the laws OF nature, and
has prevailed In all ages and countries. This
is sufficiently explicit. Indeed the force OF
language can no further go ia panegyFizlbS
the institution. But We have also an en-
phatIc avowaI of the Calhoun theory, (now
the speciality of the Southern OF BrechInridge
Democracy on the constitutional rights
of slavery in the Territories. In The same
speech. Mr.. Bell affirmS shat the '-soundhesS
of the doctrine that the Constitution Carries
slavery zsrgnT;5 ,ygr- into the Territories: that
the flag OF the Union protects the citizen m
the. eUioyment of his rights OF property OF
every description, recognized rs such N any u
the lSf.,tes. on every sea and in every Ierrlto-
~ of the Union" cannot be successfully I'M
peacbed.
That the foregoing i no iuadyeTicnt assCr-
ton, no rhetorical flourish. hut matuTed
opinion Is shown by the Senator'S vote On
the Kansas Nebraska bill four years later.
On the 18th Of February, 1854. that bill
being before the Senate, Sir. Douglas moved
by way Of amendment. to insert The follow
ing. containing the ysTy vlrns and deadly
faugs of the disastrous measure: which (the
Missouri comprOmiSel being inconsistent
with the principles of nOninteryeulIon by
Congress with slavery IN the States and
Territories, as recognized by the legislation
''Of 1850 commonly called the Compromise
''measures), IS hereby declared ua2psTof'rs rHd
''r0id'
These are the words III which the Missouri
Compromise was abolished, aud John Bell, of
Tennessee. voted for their adoption and their
incorporation in the bill, as well as AtchisOn
Geyer and Douglas. As Bell has never ac-
cepted squatter sovereignty, his vote on that
occasion was necessarily cast in conformity
with the Southern Interpretation of the
.'principles of the Kansas Nebraska bills in
other words. in conformity with the declara-
ton quoted above which ne had made four
years previously.
Tbogo f,.tS f.,r themselves No h1 ~
no comment to make on them farther than to
pUUIICsIu or Denton democrat Young Tor the
man who himself voted for the abrogatiOn of
the Missouri Compromise, and who declares
that the Constitution establishes slavery in
all the Territories. We grant that Bell voted
against the Kansas Nebraska bill on its pas
sage, but he did so because it gave aliens the
same privileges as natives in the new Terri
tOries-a circumstance which has no sort of
relation 10 his position on the slavery ques-
ton.
Thus, Mr.. BELL is doSailed North and South,
but upon opposite grounds. Republicans
assail him because he Is true to the rights of
the South and Southern democrats perycrt
his noble record to issail him as untrue to the
rights of the South. The republicans and
their allies South, in the war on Mr.. BELL,
whilst striking with different weapons, are
prompted by similar motives. The election
of Mr.. BELL would give peace to the country,
heal the dissensions whice divide the sections,
and deprive the agitators of the means of
agitation. Under his administration both
the opposing parties would be driven TO the
wall, and the people. divided in the support
Of or opposition 10 measures and principles
not of a sectional and peace disturbing char
acter. 1t behOOVes the great masses, there
fore, to arise in their strength and elect Mr..
BELL They can in no way do their country
more signal service.