of　Congress　to　regulate　the　domestic　affairs　of　the　Territories　was　doubted。　　The　Committee　declined　to　discuss　the　question　which　was　so　fiercely　contested　in　1850。　　Congress　then　refrained　from　deciding　it。　　The　Committee　followed　that　precedent　by　neither　affirming　nor　repealing　the　Missouri　Compromise；　nor　expressing　any　opinion　as　to　its　validity。　　It　intimated　that　in　1850　Congress　already　doubted　its　constitutionality。　　The　Compromise　was　now　doomed。　　The　inventive　genius　of　the　Senate　now　applied　itself　to　the　task　of　shifting　the　odium　of　its　repeal　upon　the　previous　Congress。
  While　this　bill　was　pending　in　the　Senate　Douglas　was　anxiously　scanning　the　field　to　ascertain　what　effect　it　was　producing　among　the　people。　　The　South　was　not　likely　to　be　duped。　　If　the　Missouri　Compromise　was　in　force　that　alone　excluded　slavery；　and　no　advantage　could　accrue　from　organizing　the　new　Territory　without　mention　of　the　subject。　　It　did　not　care　to　take　the　risk　of　proving　the　law　of　1820　invalid。　　Let　it　be　repealed。　　But　the　thought　of　explicitly　repealing　the　Missouri　Compromise；　which　he　had　been　wont　to　declare　inviolably　sacred；　appalled　him。　　He　dreaded　its　effect　in　Illinois　and　throughout　the　Puritanical　North；　where　moral　ideas　were　annoyingly　obtrusive。　　The　South；　though　not　demanding　the　repeal　of　the　Compromise；　would　surely　welcome　it　with　joy　and　gratitude。　The　question　of　expediency　was　a　hard　one。
  The　bill；　consisting　of　twenty　sections；　was　printed　on　January　2d　in　the　Washington　Sentinel。　　Again；　on　the　10th　of　January；　it　appeared　in　the　same　paper　with　another　section　added。　　The　new　section　provided　that　the　question　of　slavery　during　the　territorial　period　should　be　left　to　the　inhabitants；　that　appeals　to　the　Supreme　Court　should　be　allowed　in　all　cases　involving　title　to　slaves　or　questions　of　personal　freedom；　and　that　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law　should　be　executed　in　the　Territories　as　in　the　States。　　This　remarkable　change　in　the　form　and　spirit　of　the　bill　was　explained　as　resulting　from　an　error　of　the　copyist；　who　had　omitted　this　vital　section　from　it　as　originally　printed。
  On　the　16th　of　January　Senator　Dixon　of　Kentucky　offered　an　amendment　repealing　the　Missouri　Compromise。　　The　next　day　Sumner　gave　notice　of　an　amendment　affirming　it。　　The　question　could　no　longer　be　dodged。　　When　Dixon's　amendment　was　offered；　Douglas；　who　was　greatly　annoyed　by　it；　went　to　his　seat　and　implored　him　to　withdraw　it。　　But　he　refused。　　He　called　upon　Dixon　and　took　him　for　a　drive。　　They　talked　of　the　Nebraska　bill　and　the　amendment。　The　result　of　the　conference　was　that　Douglas　said　to　him：　　〃I　have　become　perfectly　satisfied　that　it　is　my　duty　as　a　fair　minded　national　statesman；　to　cooperate　with　you　as　proposed　in　securing　the　repeal　of　the　Missouri　Compromise　restriction。　　It　is　due　to　the　South；　it　is　due　to　the　Constitution；　heretofore　palpably　infracted；　it　is　due　to　that　character　for　consistency　which　I　have　heretofore　labored　to　maintain。　　The　repeal　will　produce　much　stir　and　commotion　in　the　free　States　*　*　*　*　for　a　season。　　I　shall　be　assailed　by　demagogues　and　fanatics　there　without　stint。　　*　*　*　*　Every　opprobrious　epithet　will　be　applied　to　me。　　I　shall　probably　be　hung　in　effigy。　　*　*　*　*　I　may　become　permanently　odious　among　those　whose　friendship　and　esteem　I　have　heretofore　possessed。　This　proceeding　may　end　my　political　career。　　But；　acting　under　the　sense　of　duty　which　animates　me；　I　am　prepared　to　make　the　sacrifice。　　I　will　do　it。〃
  The　bluff　Kentuckian　was　much　affected；　and　with　deep　emotion　exclaimed：　　〃Sir；　I　once　recognized　you　as　a　demagogue；　a　mere　party　manager；　selfish　and　intriguing。　　I　now　find　you　a　warm　hearted　and　sterling　patriot。　　Go　forward　in　the　pathway　of　duty　as　you　propose；　and；　though　the　whole　world　desert　you；　I　never　will。〃
  He　had　now　decided　on　his　course。　　Cass；　who　had　been　forestalled　by　his　alert　rival；　was　understood　to　be　ready　to　step　into　the　breach　if　Douglas　faltered。　　He　was　on　perilous　heights　where　a　false　step　would　be　fatal。　　Already　a　storm　of　opposition　was　brewing　in　the　North；　which　would　surely　break　upon　him　with　fury　if　he　proposed　the　repeal。　　It　might　fail　in　the　House　and　thus　leave　him　with　both　the　North　and　South　angrily　condemning　him；the　South　for　his　rashness　and　the　North　for　his　treachery。　　Pierce　was　known　to　be　opposed　to　the　express　repeal　of　the　Compromise。　　On　Sunday；　January　22d；　Douglas　called　on　the　Secretary　of　War；　Jefferson　Davis；　explained　the　proposed　change　and　sought　the　help　of　the　Administration　in　passing　the　bill。　　Davis　was　overjoyed　and　at　once　accompanied　him　to　the　White　House。　　Pierce　received　his　distinguished　visitors；　discussed　the　plan　with　them　and　promised　his　help。
  The　next　morning　Douglas　offered　in　the　Senate　a　substitute　for　the　original　Nebraska　bill；　in　which　two　radical　changes　appeared。　The　new　bill　divided　the　proposed　Territory；　calling　the　southern　part　Kansas　and　the　northern　part　Nebraska；　and　declared　the　Missouri　Compromise　superseded　by　the　legislation　of　1850　and　now　inoperative。
  On　the　next　day　appeared　the　〃Appeal　of　the　Independent　Democrats　in　Congress　to　the　People　of　the　United　States。〃　　The　paper　was　written　by　Chase　and　corrected　by　Sumner。　　It　denounced　the　original　Kansas…Nebraska　bill　as　a　gross　violation　of　a　sacred　pledge；　a　criminal　betrayal　of　precious　rights；　part　of　an　atrocious　plot　to　exclude　free　labor　and　convert　the　Territory　into　a　dreary　region　of　despotism　inhabited　by　masters　and　slaves；　a　bold　scheme　against　American　liberty；　worthy　of　an　accomplished　architect　of　ruin。　It　declared　in　a　postscript；　written　after　the　substitute　bill　was　offered　by　Douglas　on　January　23d；　that　not　a　man　in　Congress　or　out　of　it；　not　even　Douglas　himself；　pretended　at　the　time　of　their　passage　that　the　measures　of　1850　would　repeal　the　Missouri　Compromise。　　〃Will　the　people；〃　it　asked；　〃permit　their　dearest　interests　to　be　thus　made　the　mere　hazards　of　a　presidential　game　and　destroyed　by　false　facts　and　false　inferences？〃
  The　Appeal；　which　（except　the　postscript）　was　written　before　the　substitute　was　offered；　was　published　in　many　papers　in　the　North　and　produced　a　deep　sensation。　　On　the　30th　Douglas　entered　the　Senate　Chamber　angry　and　excited。　　He　had　already　begun　to　hear　the　distant　mutterings　of　the　storm。　　He　opened　the　debate　on　his　substituted　bill；　but　he　was　smarting　under　the　cruel　lash　and；　before　beginning　his　argument；　poured　out　his　rage　on　the　authors　of　the　Appeal。　　He　accused　Chase　of　treacherously　procuring　a　postponement　of　the　consideration　of　the　bill　for　a　week　in　order　to　circulate　their　libel　upon　him。　　Chase　interrupted　him　with　angry　emphasis。　　Douglas　waxed　furious　and　poured　out　his　〃senatorial　billingsgate〃　upon　the　offenders。　　Yet；　amidst　his　wrath；　he　kept　his　head　and　made　a　keen　and　ingenious　defense　of　his　course。
  The　basis　of　his　argument　was　the　proposition；　assumed　though　no　where　stated；　that　while　the　laws　of　Congress　were　specific　and　enacted　to　meet　particular　demands；　the　PRINCIPLE　embodied　in　each　law　was　general；　and　if　the　philosophic　principle　of　any　law　was　repugnant　to　that　of　any　prior　law；　however　foreign　to　each　other　the　subjects　might　be；　the　latter　must　be　held　to　repeal　the　former　by　implication；　that　the　principle　of　the　legislation　of　1850　was　repugnant　to　that　of　the　Missouri　Compromise　and　hence　repealed　it。
  Chase　at　once　replied　briefly　to　the　fiery　attack；　and　on　February　3d　delivered　an　elaborate　speech　against　the　bill；　which　Douglas　recognized　as　the　strongest　of　the　session。　　As　a　legal　argument　it　was　a　complete　and　crushing　answer　to　the　quibbling　sophistry　of　the　advocates　of　implied　repeal。　　But　it　was　not　merely　the　argument　of　a　great　lawyer。　　It　was　the　earnest　remonstrance　of　a　moralist　who　believed　in　the　eternal　and　immeasurable　difference　between　right　and　wrong。
  He　reminded　them　that　the　Missouri　Compromise　was　a　Southern　measure；　approved　by　a　Southern　President；　on　the　advice　of　a　Southern　Cabinet。　　While　in　form　a　law；　it　had　all　the　moral　obligation　of　a　solemn　contract。　　The　considerations　for　the　perpetual　exclusion　of　slavery　in　the　Territories　north　of　36　degrees　and　30　minutes　were　the　admission　of　Missouri　with　slavery；　the　permission　of　slavery　in　the　Territories　south　of　36　degrees　and　30　minutes；　and　the　admission　of　new　States　south　of　that　line　with　slavery　if　their　constitution　should　so　provide。　　The　North　had　honorably　performed　its　contract　by　the　admission　of　Missouri　and　prompt　consent　to　the　admission　of　all　other　slave　States　that　had　sought　it。　　The　South　had　yielded　nothing　to　the　North　under　the　contract；　except　the　admission　of　Iowa　and　the　organization　of　Minnesota。　　The　slave　States；　having　received　all　the　contemplated　benefits　under　the　contract　and　yielded　none；　proposed　to　declare　it　ended　without　the　consent　of　the　free　States。　　He　closed　with　an　appeal　to　the　honor　of　the　South；　earnestly　imploring　the　Senators　to　reject　the　bill　as　a　violation　of　the　plighted　faith　and　solemn　compact　which　their　fathers　had　made　and　which　they　were　bound　by　every　sacred　obligation　faithfully　to　maintain。
  Seward；　speaking　on　the　17th　cautioned　them　that　the　re