Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1848-06-30

FROM THE HON. JOHN NJ. NILES,
u. :. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT.
WASHINGTON, June 5, 1913.

ildSS uCCtlIlS VI tIlC itu'Cdl uCihoOioNJ VI
the city and county of New York.
1t is not consistent with my engagements
here, or with my sense of what Is due to
my official position, to comply with your
request; nor can | suppose that any sug-
gestion could make, were present on the
occasion, would be of any value in the pres
ent unfortunate position of political affairs
in your state and the country.
have given some attention 10 the diff |
culties in New York, and know many of
the prominent men on both of the sections
into which the democratic party is divided.
Without considering the causes OF that d.
vision, or the merits oithc proceedings which
led to the appointment OF two sets OF dele
gates to the National Convention, it is APP
parent, think, from the action Of that Con
vention. on the question raised by the con-
ficting claims Of the two delegations, that |
was decided, not in reference to the regular.
ity or irregularily of the proceedings OF one
party or the other, but from the influence OF
a great principle, which one delegation adj
hered to, and which the other disayowed.
The Utica delegates were virtually cxclu-
ded from the National Convention, because
they asserted the principle of the ordinance
OF 1887 and its applicability TO the present
territories Of the United States.
The exclusion of your delegates, therefore
by majority ofthe convention, was not on
~ condemnation of that principle, but 4
declaration that it is incompatible with that
platform upon which the democratic party
of the Union is hereafter to stand.
II this view is correct, then concession
IN ba ola E,r ha nd
gandism of slavery in some form, becomes
part Of the democratic faith, which is to
be imposed on the democrats of the north
by their brethren of the south. This may
be regarded as the slavery test, and all WHO
do not subscribe to it are to be considered
as tho rccusants, schismatlcs and lactonists.
That division of the party in New York
represented by the Utica. delegation, have
assumed a position antag0nistic to this test /;
they have boldly asserted the principles of
the ordinance of17S7, and their application
TO all free territory. BuP they have not, if
am correctly informed, made this test to
be imposed upon others, but have regarded
it as one of those questions upon which the
democracy of the north and the south could
not expect to concur, and have been willing
TO leave it to the judgment of the majority
in Congress, whenever it should come up
for decision.
You seem now to be placed in 4 situation
by which YOU are called on TO decide whe
ther you will maintain that position YOU
have assumed, or rcccde from it. ThsR
grave question: responsible one, in view
of the difficulties attending il; but, in my
judgment, not doubtful one. Where great
principles of right and liberty are concerned
or of personal honor or sel-respect, there is
no space for compromise to succumb from
tmidlty or considerations of expediency is
disgracelul, and to doubt of ultimate triumph
is TO disrust the truth of your own prnci-
pies.
Slavery, az a State institution, is rccog-
nizcd by the Constitution, and the free states
are pledged not to Interfere with it, but to
guarantee and defend it. This is a part of
the original compact between the statcs.-
But can it be introduced and sustained
where it does not cXistb the directagency
and authority of the Federal Government
Can the free states consent to this IGsO,
then slavery is no longer a state institution,
only, but becomes part of the Federal sys-
tenn. Then its responsibility no longer rests
upon the states, but upon the Union.
Hitherto Slavery has never been intro /
duced and Sustained by the authority ofCon |
gress i'll territories in whirh 1t did not exist |
when organzcd nor has Congress permit |
ted it TO introduce itself into free territory j; !
on the contrary, it has excluded it, by APP
plying to all such territories the free pr,nci-
Piles of the ordinance of 1897. Congress |
has done more; it has excluded it from !
part of one of the territories where it did ex- |
isl, when it was ccdcd to the United States. |
With the exception of the act for the annex |
alton of Texas,al the legislation of Congress, |
hitherto, has been restrictive upon slavery, |
and even that act excluded il from part Of |
the territory of Texas.
But the extraordinary pretenson is now !
set up, that slavery may exist in all the ter.
rltories of the United States, bv the author |
ltv OF the Constitution, and that it is not in .
the power of Congress or the people of the |
territory TO exclude il. This makes it the .
supreme law olthe land, and when any free .
territory is acquired, the law of slavery is .
Immediately extended over it. Such is the |
light IN which these new pretcnsions of the
of the slave power exhibit the free institu-
lions of the country.
This Is the position of one portion
Of the south. Another party there, in
which there IS more general concurrence
than at the north, do not 90 SO far: they on
ly deny that Congress has any power to
prohibit slavery in territory. and that 1T
must be left TO introduce itself if it can. eth
er by the will Of majority of the people,
1