The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1850-04-02
1Dolitifal Department.
From the Washington Republic
LETTER OF MR.. CLINGMAN, OF N. Z
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
March %, 1850.
To the Editors of the Republic:


it necessary to resort to your columns, take this
occasion to advert to certain other points ol
discussion. You have heretofore, while con.
demning ultra politicians, thought proper, in
several of your editorials, to include me by
name in that class.
But whe are to be regarded as ultra politi:
clans with reference to the great issue pending!
The most ultra on the southern side of the ques.
ton that know of, claim that slavery shall go
into all the territories Of the United States which
are common property, until it shall be excluded
BY State constitutions.
An ultra northern man is he who claims that
slavery shall be excluded from all the territory.
Ifone of these views be more ultra than the 9TH.
er, it must be the northern one, because even If
the southern view were adopted in practice, nor
thern men might occupy any part of the terri
tory without being deprived of any legal advan.
tage which they possess in their own States,
and would have the further privilege, if they
chose to exercise it, of holding slaves. If, how.
ever, slavery should be excluded, the southerner
would find himself deprived Of certain advanta.
ges which he would enjoy at home.
Those men who, standing between these two
opposite extremes, are willing that there should
be an equitable division of the territory, may
well claim to be the moderate men. In this
class will fall, as far as kno q, all the Southern
members of Congress, as we'll as the entire
mass of the Southern people. Whatever may
be their views as to the powers Of this Govern.
ment over the territory they are willing, in fact
that there shall be a fair division.
The real question at issue, therefore, is not
whether the South shall have all the territory.
or even more than the North, but whether it
shall b. permitted to possess any part of it
For example, if the Missouri line of SO deg. 80
were extended to the Pacific, then of all the
common property, viz: the territory not inclu-
ded within any of the States, only one sixth part
lies south of that line: yet when, on behalf of
the South, we insist that this comparatively
small part shall be left open to US, our claim is
denounced rs monstrous pretension, as insuf.
ferable Southern arrogance.
With Just as much fairness might the South
be excluded from any share of the public money
and other public property. Of the sum annu.
ally oaid out of the public treasury, a small
part comparatively is expended in the slavehold-
ing States. This portion of the disbursement
the North might insist on stopping with as good
3 grace as they can support their present claim.
To prove that if that SUM were also expended
in the free States it would be productive of
greater good, they might use just the same ar
guments that they now resort to. While the
principle would be the same, too, in each case,
it is clear that the ultimate mischief to the South
in the future, will be much greater from the ex-
clusion from all the territory. than could result
from depHving US of any share in the public
money.
If these new principles, which seem to have
been adopted by most of the Northern polit-
clans, are to prevail; if this Government is to-
acquire Territory by conquest or by purchase,
and the Southern States are to be required to-
furnish their full proportion of men aud money,
and then the fruits Of victory are to be appro.
priated exclusively by the North, it is idle to
suppose that the South will 60 into any such
Plrtnershir.
The Southern people have been zee too long
to consent thus to become the vassals of the
North. As their object is to obtain recogni.
ton Of their right to participate fairly in the
bene6ts of the National Territory, their oppo.
sition is not limited to particular mode of ex.
elusion, as the Wilmot proviso. 1t extends to|
all such action on the part of the Federal Gov.
ernment as places it always against them and
their institutions II, for example, when Terri.
tory Is acquired in which slavery legally exists,
as was the case with the Louisiana Territory,
then the Government is directly to interfere, and
by an act of Congress to abolish slavery, as il
did in more than three.fourths Of that Territory;
and when, on the other hand, an acquisition of
different character is made, it is Intentionally
20 to manage as to exclude shareholders from
al parts Il; it is obvious that the character of
our political system would be essentially chang.
Cd; so that the Government, instead of being
that Of the whole Union, would have been con.
verted into mere machine, for the advance.
ment of the northern section.
BY one mode of proceeding, for example, we
are asked to admit California as a State forth.
with. But New Mexico and Deseret are in|
just rs much want of Legislative aid, and their
inhabitants are just as urgent in their demands
for our action in their cases. Inasmuch there.
foIe, as the inhabitants of all these Territories
are in the same situation, and have all present
ed US forms of government, why discriminate
between thems Why grant the request of one
set and refuse it to the othersa Is it because
California has made Constitution excludingl
slavery, while the other two Territories have
not imposed any such restrictions in their forms
efGoyernmept! is it for this reason, say,
20 An- - l,osk haro ~ oil