The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1850-01-24
THE NATIONAL ERA WASHINGTON D. c. JANUARY a. 1850

the District Of Columbia, in protecting the for
eign slave trade for twenty years, in reenacting
the slave laws Of Louisiana and Florida, IN striv-
ing to negotiate treaties with foreign Power for
the recspture Of fugitive slaves, In demanding Of
Great Britain compensation for slaves driven by
Providence into British ports, in protecting the
coastwise slave trade, in seeking to uphold Sla-
very in Cuba, to prevent emancipation In Texas,
and in bringing that foreign State into the Union,
granting to her representation for her slaves,
and enabling her to reclaim them when fugitive
In any part of the Union Motley approve,
and sustain all these acts of Intervention, and
then clamor for Non IaiaveRion, What do they
mean by Non-Ia,erueuion? action for Sldrag
Non-aoiioa against Il.
Said we not truly that the term was used, not
to define, but to conceal system of policy2
The Territories now belonging to the United
States are free; hut Mr.. Calhoun and the South
claim that property in slaves stands precisely on
the same footing with other property, and may
rightfully be carried into these Territories as the
common domain Of all the States. In the absence
of positive law against Slavery, slaves will be
introduced into these Territories, just as they
have always been carried where no law prevented.
To insist, then, upon the non-action OF the Gov
eminent in this case in other words Non-inter-
reation, is to insist that no provision shall be
made against the extension of Slavery into all
these Territories. In plain words, the Non-Ine'-
re,tioA Of the Washington Union, General Cas-,
and their followers, is Siarery Propag0ndsm, moth
ing more nothing less--and they know it.
We 90 for Non Intervention, in its legitimate,
honest meaning, as the doctrine of the Constita-
ton, the true policy of the country Had 1t
been strictly and uniformly adhered to by the
Federal Government from the commencement
there never would have been any Slavery within
its exclusive jurisdiction; there would have been
no Slavery-extension, no conflict between North
and South, no ground for the political agitation
of the subject in the non-ssveholdiDg States
1t is the lopg-continued Intervention of the
Government in support and extension Of Slavery
that has given birth to the present agitation
The non-slaveholding citizens Of the Republic
have come to the conclusion, that the Government,
for the action of which they are chiefly respon-
sible, shall no longer be used, directly or indi-
rectly, in the propagation and encouragement of
Slavery. They take their stand on the policy of
Non Intervention, as a reality, not pretence. The
Territories are free-Slsyery cannot be introduced
into them without tba positive oetinn- or imnIied
assent, of the Federal Government Neither
shall be allowed. Having the power to keep the
Territories free, not to use il when shareholders
are claiming the right to take their slaves there,
Is to sanction the claim. To allow the commits
sion Of wrong that we may prevent, is to make
ourselves responsible for the wrong-it is virtual
interv' ,ton in favor Of the wropg-dOer AS one
of the no .laveholders Of the country, we insist,
and shall o.. irue to insist whatever may be the
consequences, that the Federal Government re-
lieve itself from all responsibility for the exist
ence Of Slavery wherever il has constitutional
jurisdiction and this is the only true Non-lnter-
vention Platform. Let the Government assume
this position, and Slavery will then remain as
the founders of the Constitution intended it
should remain, confined to the limits of the States
under the sole control on the sole responsibility,
Of State authority.