Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1851-06-05

From the National Era
Supreme Court and Ordinance OF
1887.

fundamental law and our shlelu Oh ieouoh - :
understand them, their main reason lor tlieir
Jpinion seems to be that if the ORDNANCE Is ieit
IN force the States would not be on an equal
footinp" in the language of the Constltutlon;--
Good Heavens, what reason II Is true tnat
Congress has right TO admit nc" ota'es vi, an
" eoIol footing" with the old ones But TINS does
moi mean on an eqltal degradation with the '0orSt
of them ON an equal despOLiSm with the most
vicious fake it that there was meant to be
some Standard or basis of equality was 1t the
low. degrading. despotic, anti-republlcan OASIS
or the 6ipb, noble, democratic, Tree one again,
for whose benefit was the Supreme Court tal6'ng
mot dcc;dinol when wishing to place States up
ON an e0uai footing? Was 1t for the benefit OF
those States living under the Ordinance COM
nact2 Did tie Supreme Court think that we
,nqnted I1rrcr liberty, and would not be free
70 introduce slavery and involuntary servlude
unless thew should declare the Ordinance OF no
force mon us2 Did they wish to give us the
same DEGREE of GbertiniSm that the worst States
claim, foT themselves ? Did they declare this
glorions Ordinance invalid, in order to give us
wider scone to do wrong? If they did, we don't
thank them for this gratuitous opinion. We ask
NOT the nrivileqe of making monarchy, ollgar-
civ or despotism. The standard of equality,
TO Which all should come, we claim to be that
hicb one laid down in the Ordinance, and con-
templated by the Constitution; and not that low
one practiced by South Carolina, and not con-
tcmplated by the Constitution
7 had supDosed the Ordinance of 1857 to be
regular cOmpqct las it expresses itself between
the original States and the people Of the Terri
tory. and the States 10 be formed out of it, for
ever binding and unalterable, unless by common
consent. | never knew, or heard, OF It's being al
tered, or Of any attempt being made for that pur
nose. unless we refer to the attempt to suspend
its operation IN Indiana for the purpose Of intro
ducino slavery there. On the contrary, had
heard of its being ratified by the first Congress,
almost unanimously, and Of each State admitted
from its territory being put under the condition
of abiding nv and conforming to that ordinance !;
and that condition has been complied with on
the part of these Northwestern States generally.
The Ordinance, when made, referred to- and was
binding in EXPRESS terms upon, the States to be
formed out of this territory.
The peopb here, in the Territory, did not
adopt the Constitution. The original States,
acting alone in making and adopting the Consti-
tuition, had no power 10 alter the ordinance com
pact without the consent Of the people OF the
Territory. The Constitution was made by inc
old States, without attempting to set aside the
Ordinance. They did not even insist that a
new State, when ii should come to ask Tor ad-
mission from this territory, should be admitted
upon condition of its giving up the Ordinance
compact On the contrary, they required con-
formity to the Ordinance, and made That con-
ditition of admission. There is nothing erpreS
SeG in the Constitution, by which the Supreme
Court should come to so miserable a conclusion
as that, by adopting the Constitution, the Ordl-
nance must be given up; nor is there anything
| from which such an idea could be implied; nor
is there anything in the fact of making new
Constitution and leaving the old Contederacy,
which, in the nature Of things, must make an
utter conhictlon or inconsistency; SO that one
must fall or the other give way. No such thing
On the contrary, there is an entire consistency
between the Constitution and the Ordinance, as
they stood at the making of both and had their
provisions and spirit been respected, and had
our Government acted consistently with both,
there would now be no conflict in fact, and no
necessity or excuse for the Supreme Court to
say what they have said about an equal footing,
by which understand them to mean SIMPLY an
eqIQt footiRg in despotsm as well as lnlqultY:
The UniItd States Constitution says that the
migration or importation of such persons as any
of the States noU eriSting shall think proper to
admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress
prior to the year 1608.'-Se 8, .AH. |. This
looked like preventing any more territory or
States from becoming slaveholdlng. The Ordl-
nance of 1887 says, (Art. g. "There shall be
neither slavery nor involuntary servltude IN the
said territory, &c, provided, always, that any
person escaping into the same, from whom ser
vice is lawfully claimed in any one OF the Original
tSlateS such fugitves may be lawfully reclaimed
&C." Now, these two Instruments Ordnance
and Constitution, almost simultaneous In thell
making and adoption, looked to the fact thai
there was to be no more slave States or slave
territory. That is fixed position, with cypress
language, that cannot be galnsayed by any In
tegent, honest, unprejudiced court. The word;
" original States" in the Ordinance, and estates
now existing" in the Constitution, show that II
this respect an effort was made to have both IN
struments consistent with each other. And these
facts, together with the provision leaving Con
gress the power after 1903 to cut off the slave
trade, show that it was expected not only tc
prevent any more slave States from being made
but to suppress slavery in the old States, and thus
make them Republican. 1t seemed as though
Congress were expected to cut the jugular ven
of slavery, in the old States, as soon as 1900
should come round.
The Constitution of the United States wa'
made fair instrument on its face and Its stand
drd in conformity to which old States and new
States admitted should be placed on an equa
footing, was simply that Of Republlcansm, II
contradistinGton to monarchy ollgarcny, arls
ocracy, or absolutism and this Republicansn
had its meaning, in the minds of our Revolution
ary foreIahers, as in conformity to the prlncl
pies of the Declaration of Independence, bu
not according to the meaning attached to tina
word by old England or by South Carolina. ]
is libel upon our forelathers. 1t is untrue t.
the common acceptatien Of that word to say
that South Carolina conforms to the standard o
Republcansm as meant to be understood by gu
Constitution. The Declaration of Independence
and the principles avowed III it, the Constitution
and its guarantees for liberty, the Ordinance ant
its prohibition of slavery, and the power givel
: Congress to prevent the extension OF SLAYER,
into new States, all 60 to show what stdndart
of Republicansm and equality our fathers hat
reference to.
The truth is, the Supreme Court sees, will
this Ordinance in the way, that we are not Doun'
to deliver fugitiyes from service to any but tn
original States. Hence the necessity of avoid
ing this incoDyenient, fundamental, forever bind
ing compact. In doing so, they give our stan
dard of equal footing the libertine's range, TIT
pirates privilege. Sage men their decision
will render them famous as great and profound
jurists, as incomupibe liberty loving men, gov
erned by the safe rule of strict construction
against slavery, and liberal construction in ia
vor of liberty and Republlcanism
And what becomes of all the articles of com
pact contained in the Ordinance by that decis
lon2 Are those respecting the navigabty o
rivers, the payment of due proportion Of nation