Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1849-02-14


and the North opposed 10 il without it. The debate
ana aSitauon continued until the session well
advanced but 1t became apparent towards its close
that the people OF Missouri were 6xed and resolved
IN 'heir opposition TO the proposed condition, and
that they would certainly reject it and adopt con-
su'utloh without il, should the bill pass with the
condition Such heing the case, it required no
great effort OF mind to perceive, that Missouri once
IN possession OF a constitution and government, not
Simply on paper. but with Legislators elected and
oficsS appointed, 10 carry them into effect, the
grave questions would be presented, whether she
was OF right State or Territory and if the latter
whether Congress had the right, and If the right
the power to abrosate her constitutions dsperse her
legislature and to remand her back to the erritori-
al condition.
These were great, and, under the circumstances
fearful questions-too fearful TO be met by those
who had raised the agitation, from that time the
only question was how 10 escape from the difficulty
Fortunately means was afforded. A compro
mise Gas it was caed) was offered, based ON the
terms that the North should cease TO oppose the
admission Of Missouri on the grounds for which
the South commended, and that the provisions of
the ordinance of 1887, for the government of the
Northwestern territory, should be applied TO all
the territory acquired by the United States from
France, under the treaty Of Louisiana lying North
OF 5o 80, eXcep: the portion lying in the Stale OF
Missouri. The Northern members embraced it !;
and although not originating with them, adopted
II as their own. 1t was forced through Congress
by the almost unanimous votes of the North,
against minority consisting almost entirely of
members from The Southern States.
Such was the termination of this the first con-
hict, under the constitution, between the two Sec
tons, in reference 10 slavery i'm connection with ter
Iitorles. Many hailed ii as permanent and final
adjustment that would prevent The recurrence Of
similar conflicts; but others, less sanguine took the
opposite and more gloomy view regarding il as the
N n nin
Union asunder, and PROSTATE our political system
One oil these was the experienced aud sagacious
Jefferson. Thus far time wonld seem to favor his
1orebodinSs May returning sense OF justice, and
protecting Providence, avert their final fulfil
ment.
For many years the subject of slavery in refer
ence to the territories ceased 10 agitate the coun
try. Indications, however, connected with the
question oil annexlng Texas, showed clearly that it
was ready TO break out again, with redoubed vic.
lence, OH some future occasion. The difference in
the case OF Texas was adjusted by extending the
missouri compromise line OF 80 30, from its termi-
NUS on the western boundary OF the Louisiana pur-
chase, 10 the western boundary Of Texas. The agi-
tation again ceased for a short period
The war with Mexico soon followed, and that
terminated in the acquisition of New Mexico and
Upper California, embracing an area equal 10 about
one-hal the entire valley oil the Mississippi. Ii to
TINS we adj the portion OF Oregon acknowledged To
be ouiS by The recent treaty with England, our
whole territory on the Pacific and west OF the
Rocky mountains will be found TO be in extent but
little less than that vast valley The near prospect
oil SO great an addition rekinded The excitement
between the North and the South in reference to
slavery IN lis connexion with the territories, which
has become since those on the Pacific were acqui-
red, more universal and intense than ever
These ELECTS have been TO widen the difference
between The two sections, and TO give more de-
teInined and hostile character 10 their conflict
The North no longer respects the Missouri com.
promise line, although adopted by their almost IL
unanimous vote Instead OF compromise, they avow
that their determination is TO exclude slavery from
all The territories OF the United Sta,es acquired
10 be acquired; and OF course TO prevent the citi-
Zens OF tie Southern States from cnigratng with
their property IN slaves into any Of them. Their
object they allege, is 10 prevent the extension OF
slavery and ours to extend it, thus making the is
sue between them and us to be the naked question
shall slavery be extended or not /? We do not deem,
II necessary, looking 10 the object of this address TO
examine the question so fully discussed al the last
session, whether Congress has the right 10 exclude
the citizens OF the South from migraing with
their property into territories belonging TO the coz
federated States ofthe Union. What we propose
In this conneXion is, TO make few remarks on
what The North alleges, erfUneousy TO be the issue
between US and them.
SO far from maintaining the doctrine which the is
sue implies, we hold that the federal government
has no right TO extend or restrict slavery no more
than to establish or abolish it nor has ii any right
whatever TO distinguish between the domestic in.
situations Of one State section and another in
order 10 favor the one, ana discourage tie other
AS the federal representative Of each and all the
States, It is bound 10 deal out, within the sphere of
IFS powers, equal and exact justice and favor TO all
10 act otherwise, 10 undertake TO discriminate be
tween the domestic institutions of one and another
would be to act IN total subveIson Of the end for
which 1t was esldbshed to be the common trotpctor
& guardian OF all. Entertaining 4csc opinions, we
ask not as the North alleges we do Tor the ex-
tension of slavery. That would make discr,n-
nation in favor as unjust and as demonstrations
al as the discrimination they ask against us in their
tavor. IL Is not Tor them Tor The federal GOV
eminent TO determine whether our domestic insti
tuition is good or bad or whether it should be re.
pressed or preserved. 1t belongs TO us, and W. on
~, TO decide such questions. What then we do in
sis on Is not to extend slavery, bat that we shall
not be prohibited from ENGRAVING with orr prop
erty into the Territories OF the United States be-
cause we Shareholders Or in other words, that
we shall not on that account be dSGidnchised of q
privilege possessed by all others citizens and for
elSnerS without discrimination to character pro.
ieSsIon or color. ALL whether savage barbarian
or civilized, may freely enter and remain, we only
being excluded.
Wefest our claims, not only on the high grounds
above stated, but also on the solid foundation of
night, justice, and equality The territories nne.
datciy III controversy, New Mexico and California
were acquired by the common sacrifice and efforts
OF all the States towards which the South contrib.
uted fdf more Than her full share of men, TO say
nothing oil money, and is, of course, on principles Of
right, justice, fairness and equality entitled full,
to participate in the benefits TO be derived from
their acquisition. But as impregnable as is this
ground, there is another not less So Ours is a fed
erdl govcrnment-a government in which, not in
dividuas, but States, as distinct sovereign cornmu
mites, the constituents 10 them. as mem
bers OF the federal Union, the territories belong
and they arc hence declared TO be territories DC
longing TO the United States The States then ara
the joint owners Now, it is conceded by all Wi
tiers on the subject, that in all such governments
'voluntecrs from the South-Regimcn,s, 3:
Batlai!ons, l.
Companies, l.
Total number Of Volunteers from The South 1851
Volunteers from The acknowledgements q
Battalion5