Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1848-07-13


He went into history of the ordinance
to show that it was compromise for the
purpose of securing to the south the proyis-
ion for the arrest and return of fugitive
slaves. The South had been faithful to that
compromise, but the West had not, with the
exception of Illinois. They had passed
laws which rendered the proviso for the re-
covery of slaves a Dullity.
Mr.. flanagan and Mr.. Corwin said that
there were no such laws in their respective
states.
Mr.. Calhoun was glad to learn the fact,
and would be pleased also to learn that there
were no organized companies in those states
to prevent the recovery of slaves
lie came next to consider the Missouri
Compromise. The South, he said, never
acquicsced in it, They were voted down.
1t was carried by northern votes. He vindi-
Gated Mr.. Jefferson from the charge that he
was the author of the slavery restriction.-
In letter to Mr.. Adams, Mr.. J. said he
felt no uneasiness about banks, bankrupt
laws, manufactures, the Florida Treaty, &c
but he looked on the Missouri question as
the most dangerous one in our affairs This
was fnaSl9. Subsequently he addressed
letter to John Holmes, in reply to a letter
from Mr.. III. giving his reasons for voting
for the Compromise. This letter is long
and lugubrious, expressing the belief that
the slave question was to destroy the Union
and the hopes of the world, and consider
ing the Missouri Compromise as the Begin
ming ofthe troubles arising from that source
Mr.. Jefferson had, however, committed
great error in moving that short provision
in the old Congress, relative to slavery in
the North West territory.
The power to acquire territory--and he
agreed that we had the right-must neces-
sarily be accompanied with sole and exclu-
sive power over the territory-but sole and
exclusive power were not absolute power
This government acted only as Trustees in
this case, and the trust was limited to GER
tain objects-the sale of the lands and the
admission of the territories as States.
The territories belonged to the States a
lone, as common partners, and it followed
that Congress could not, as a trustee, ex-
clude portion of the people of the Union
from any of these States. Mr.. c. then de-
MED that the people of the territories them
selves could exclude shareholders, coming
with their slaves; for if they could, then
few squatters or Mexcans could take pos
session of the territory, and exclude every
person.
Having shown that neither Congress nor
the people of the territories could exclude
slavery, he went on to show that it could not
be excluded by the institutions Of the con-
quered territory. Mexico had indeed abol-
ished African Slavery, though she tolerated
worse description of slavery SO had she
excluded the Protestant religion from it
but would it be said that the conquered par
ty can impose laws on the conquerors
Mr.. G. went on to show that the Southern
States had contributed their full share to
the acquisition of Oregon, and he appealed
to the Senators to say whether in Justice and
in common honesty, they could exclude the
South. As to the rest of the territory
the CALIFORNIA; and New Mexico-which
had cost so much blood and treasure-and
to which the South had given its full share
how could the Northern States make of
it MONOPOLY close corporation-and
undertake to exclude the South He APP
lpealed to the Southern Senators to say
whether they were willing to sink down-to
\ yield their right to equal share in this COM
mon fund and, so, what condition would
they be left inl
The question could never be finally and
effectually settled, but by leaving it to the
! Constitution. If left to the Constitution, it
would, in his opinion, be settled nearly BY
the line Of 36 deg, 80 min. 1t might not
I be direct line, and so much the better for
: harmony He would assure gentlemen that
there was never SO great mistake as that
which the people of the North had fallen
into, that white labor was degraded in the
South by association with slavery. 1t was
true white men could not, in the south, per-
form mental Offices; as body and domestic
servants; but as laborers in the field, and
as mechanical operatives, their position was
infinitely elevated by slave labor. No white
man came to his house to perform the small
lest mechanical labor or free-labor, who did
not set down at his table with him and his
5 family and he was proud to have him there.
Mr.. Calhoun said this was the time for
|, settling this question. The longer it was
f left open, the more ncurable it would be.
, 1t was never nearer that point than now
: He advocated the proposition offered by Mr.
$ Bright to adopt the Missouri compromise
9 The eve of Presidential election he con-
sidered as favorable to the settlement of the
question: OeCduse IL was an occasion winch
: would enable all to see the dangerous char
acter of the question. Should this happy
, Union be terminated by this slavery ques-
E ton, the future historian would attribute il
$ to the ideas and doctrines growing out OF
E the ordinance of 1877, and the Missouri
' compromise or seeking more reconcile
. cause, he might look to what was fatal er-
ror-that " all men were born free and e.
| qual."
} He was not afraid to speak on this SUBJ
Iceland he would declare that there was
t not word oftruth in it. AN men"-men
A were not born" Infants were born
E They grew to be men. Infants were not
: born equal. They were subject to their pa
rents till twenty-oDe, under our laws. In
! no case were men born equal, Nine men
out of ten, if asked where they got this tru-
, ism, would say that they took it from the
= Declaration of Independence but it was
, not so. The Declaration said, all men
were created free and equal" But this was
: untrue. Only one pair was created and of
those one was subject to the other. This
, error was now, in concert with other caus-
es, upheaving the fabrics of European in