The Kalida venture. [volume] (Kalida, Ohio) 1841-1865, 1847-11-02

the line Of tho Missouri Compromiseto the Pas.
fic coast is warmly advocated at the seat oi gov
ernment, and elsewhere, asa measure ofjustice
to the peculiar institutions Of tho South, aad as
project calculated to harmonize the conflicting
interests and fseings Of tho various sections OF
the Union. Harmony ia desirable, II not pur-
chased at too great sacrifice, and osr Union and
integrity as one great people, ought always TO BE-
first consideration, but these will not Js hazard
cd whatever disposition is made OF this question.
The South has Threatened too often and toe
enuscle isly to create unnecessary apprehension
now.
We have thus far seen no good reason why the
most fertile portion Of tho soil, by far the largest
proportion Of the territory to BE- acquired, the best
harbors, and by consequence the commerce and
wealth Of tho Pacifc coast, should be placed un-
der the control .! slave institutions, and msa-
gre belt Of arid and dssert territory devoted to
the expansion Of the cnergiss Of free labor. To
call this compromise Of the question is hyPoeri-
sy II is in fact merelya prctext for selfish polite
clans at the north to cover their yielding up the
rights of free labor to the ever increasing do
mands Of the southern s.aveocracy.
We dislike compromises of righ, in favor Of
wrong. II by right the south are entitled to this
territory for the OF slavery ought not to be
withheld. But the Missouri Compromise, which
waslimitsd 10 the acquisitions made by the LouisA
lana purchase, is bounded by it's swn limitation,
AMI 10 ne rule Of future legislation. Besides, the
Missouri Compromise SET bounds to tho extern
sion Of slavery in territory where it would other
wise have had legal existence; until now Am
srican Legislation has never been proposed to ex-
tend il to free territory. 1t is true when we aa-
qurod Louisiana, Florida, and Texas, we added
to the area Of slavery in the Union, but we did
not create slavery where it before had no exis-
tsnee. We wanted the territory, and it was re-
ceived with the laws and institutions pertaining
to it, so far as these did no, conflict with I" a ro-
publicnn form Of government" If by the re-
eognition Of this principle in the Of Florida
and Texas the slsvsholding States were incrsaa-
ed without any equivalent, we do no, perceive
upon what rule Of equity the principle should now
be abandoned, whom the gain will result to tho
free States, or that this state ei facts requires
any compromise of the rights of free labor Up
on this point We cannot dc bottor than quo,e from
ales,er by Hon. Robert Dale Owos. He says:
If our Mexican difficulties result, as they
probably will, in the acquisition Of California
and New Mexico, these territories, in my
judgment, ought, as matter Of principle,
and will, in point Of fact, remain free. The
spirit ofthe age and the natural progress oi
events, are tending to that result; and the
spirit Of international law sanctions, il j, does
not prescribe it.
"No actual slavery, Though miserable sys-
tenn Of peonage, now exists in any Mexican
State or Territory. 1t is excluded bya con-
stitutional provision. Unless we suffer the
exclusion 10 continue, in case of annexation,
we, in fact, alter the fundamental law, so as
to cause the existence Of slavery, where,
now, it does not exist. We do this, in a
country, which has regularly organized
government, no matter how feebly or oppres-
svely administered; in country, which,
whatever we may think Of its social progress,
has been admitted into the community Of
States by us, and by the rest Of the civilized
world; in country, then, subject as we are,
to that code Of maxms and humane princi-
pies known as the law of Nations. Ii after
conquest or cession, we incorporate any por-
ton of Mexican territory into our Union,
the incorporation must be effected, not as
we admit desert or savage territory, but ac-
cording to the principles ofihat code, in such
case provided.
"That California or any other territory con-
quercd by US, or ceded to US, will after in
corporation, be absolutely subject TO the va
rying laws, which, from time 10 time, our
Congress may enact for its government, is,
doubtless true Yet just regard for popu-
lar rights strictly demands, that changes, es-
pecially of the organic law, should not be
made for light cause.
at is true, that Now Mexico and the Cal
ifornias are vory thinly inhabited; and this
might fairly be urged, if othcr circumstances
conspired 10 favor legislative innovation; If
our Government, for example, having acquir-
ed these Territories, proposed TO change
some domestic law, of manfeslly Injurious
influence on society But few will contend,
tha, the absence of laws lagaliziag slavery,
produces any such injurious influence.
''Le, US, however, hereafter legislate Tor
these territories as we will, see not,
meanwhile, how, under any fair and liberal
construction of the law Of Nations, we can
avoid the conclusion, that. it New Mexico
ard California become ours by treaty, that
law will exclude slavery thence, unless. by
some positive act Of Legislation, we establish
it there"
savery claims 10 be domestic instation; It Is re-
eognized by the Constitution. While maintains this
character law abiding citizen, without ts limits will
desire to interfere with it, But when demands exten
son when il absorbs all that is valuable in the acquis