We lay before our readers this morning, the able and interesting speech of
Mr. BOYCE, recently made in the House of Representatives.
It contains thoughts and matter worthy of special note, in view of the
momentous events which are now impending over the country.
It is a fact which cannot be disguised, that
"But here our duty will cease. We shall never become the apologists for the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, or the advocates or defenders of the Compromise of 1850, until the Compromise of 1820 be restored to the statute books; and all who were concerned in the passage of the Nebraska Bill, will very shortly learn, that they have raised a feeling throughout the entire North, which argues evil to the whole question of slavery and destruction to all the Compromises upon which it rests. The very silence of the North -- the apparent submission of all parties to the Nebraska outrage-- to us wears an aspect of determination which, threatens dangers to the Union.
Never before have we witnessed such intense determination upon any subject as exists in relation to the Nebraska outrage. Every Union man that we have conversed with -- every Whig, and every Democrat -- unite in expressing their indignation at this great National outrage, and there determination to resort at once to the only constitutional remedy -- Repeal."
The New York Times holds this same opinion, though uttered in coarse and insolent terms. The State and press of South Carolina can well despise the abuse of a paper whose editor has been baptized in the sewers of personalities, which daily flow from Northern journalism.
Again, Mr. SEWARD, in his last speech, made in the Senate on the night of the passage of the Nebraska bill, closed his remarks thus:
" It is an extraordinary circumstance, which you, Sir, the present
occupant of the Chair, Mr. STEWART, I am sure will not gainsay,
that at this moment, when there seems to be more complete divergence of the
Federal Government in favor of Slavery than ever before, the sentiment of
universal Liberty is stronger in all the Free States than it ever was
With that principle the present Democratic party must now come into a
Their prestige of Democracy is fast waning by reason of the hard service
which their alliance with their slaveholding brethren imposed upon them.
I see in that circumstance and in the fact that they are brought, by
supporting the interest of the slave labor in the new Territories, in
opposition to the free laborers of the North in the new Territories and States,
that they are losing, and are destined to lose, by persevering in that policy,
the power which they have held so firmly and so long.
That power will not come back to them again, until the principle
established here now shall be reversed, and a Constitution shall be given not
only to Kansas and Nebraska, but also even to other national Territory, which
will not be a tabula rasa, but a Constitution securing equal, universal and
And now, as the first startling outbreak of fierce passion, we have the
meeting at Feneuil Hall, the speeches of THEODORE PARKER, and of WENDELL
PHILLIPS, declaring that
The New York Courier and Enquirer says that henceforward it will be impossible to execute the law, except by a resort to force. Such is the prospect before us Should it not awaken the deepest attention on the part of the South? The peace which she promised herself, as the return for so much concession, is at an end. She read history with the eyes of hope, rather than of truth. The Abolition party appears now upon the field stronger than ever before. The repeal of the Missouri Compromise has struck a chord in the Northern heart, whose echoes abolitionism will ring from one end of the land to the other. It dismembers the Democratic party, and compels it to an issue hostile to the South. The Whigs stand a unit on the question. Not one from the North, in either House or Senate, voted for the bill.
We look, then, for a renewal of the struggle.
The Boston riot is a link in the chain.
It is another warning to the South-- another lifting up of the veil of
troubles yet to come.
This document was produced as part of a document analysis project by Lloyd Benson, Department of History, Furman University. (Proofing info: Entered by Ben Barnhill, Proofed by Ryan Burgess.) This electronic version may not be copied, or linked to, or otherwise used for commercial purposes, (including textbook or publication-related websites) without prior written permission. The views expressed in this document are for educational, historical, and scholarly use only, and are not intended to represent the views of the project contributors or Furman University.