The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-05-27

other it has been abolished, having never been
prevalent. II is most evident, from this great
historical fact, that theContinental Congress in
tended TO equalize the territorial or geographi-
cal extent Of the two institutions, within the
then existing limits of the United States And
If the convention that formed the Constitution
so soon afterwards, intended otherwise, if they
intended that one class of slaves should be In
creased, and not the other, why did they not
say SO?
We know there were men in the convention
Northern and Southern, opposed to slavery. We
rely on that fact as decisive. For if il had been
practicable to procure the adoption of an anti
slavery clause in the Constitution, it would have
been DONE If there had been any chance for
such clause, the attempt in its favor would
have been made. That the attempt even was not
made, is conclusive evidence that the object of
such an attempt was not the object of the Con-
stitution.
Mr.. WEBSTER recites passage from his
ing that when new States propose to come into
the Union, it is the right of the existing men,
bers to prescribe condtions--and asserting the
right of the North to reject on account of slave
ry. And he applies this doctrine to territory
already in the Union But he excuses himself
for not imposing the Wilmot Proviso, or anti
slavery restriction, on Utah and New Mexico
because slavery had no chance of going there
because, therefore, such clause would have
been needless insult and irritation to the South
and because the passage of the Texas bound
AIRY bill was necessary to prevent civil war; In
all this DIR. WEBSTER asserts the rightfulness
and constitutionality of the Wilmot Proviso-
and justifes its application yet to those terrific
ries, or refusal to admit them with slavery, as
States. Such is the Cabinet construction of the
measures. Well, Northern faith is
destined to become as historically famous as
Punic faith: andthe very name of Compromise
we are afraid will hereafter become synony-
nous with fraud, hypocrisy and outage
Both Mr. WEBsTER's reprobation of slavery
in the States, as a moral and political evil, and
his lament that Congress has no power over it
there, deserve moments attention. The
power over slavery without the States, which
MIR. WEBSTER asserts, is a power over slavery
in the States If slavery can be confined i'm
prisoned, surrounded taxed, lamented, and de-
it may and must be destroyed The
natural increase of slaves, without any increase
of area, is fatal. If such is the policy of this
glorious Union"-if such be the design of its
champions and expounders-of that class of the
ruling section most liberal, and tolerant, and
it is for the victim to decide
whether she will consent to be thus pinioned,
hat the fires of fanaticism and bigotry may en-
circle her. AS for the afiectation or the delu-
sion, that slavery in our system is a moral or
political evil, it has no excuse, except in the
dream of universal equality which kindled the
French revolution, and was extinguished by it
except in the newspaper statistics and specula-
tons concqning Southern numerical, financial,
and moral decline, which the returns of the GEN.
sus have annihilated.
The only evidence Of Southern decline is the
apathy and infatuation in which the South re
poses, when her safety, rights, power and honor
are compromised.