The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1851-03-27
For the National Era.
SUPREME COURT AND ORDINANCE OF 1851.


has been very free in giving an extraJudicial de-
cisiOn against the validity of the Ordinance of
| 1857, which we have all along esteemed TO be our
fundamental law and our shield Of Ieedom. If |
understand them their main reason for their
opiHOn seems TO be that if the Ordinance is left in
force, the States would not be on an "eqndl foot
! ing y in the language of the Constitution. Good
! Heavens what reason IL Is true that Con-
gress has a right to admit new States on an "eguai
JootiagD with the old ones But this does not
mean, on an syaGi DEGRADATION with the wOra OF
them on an equal despOiism with the most vicious
take il that there was meant TO be some standard
or 6aSis Of equality; was it the low, degrading,
despOtic anti-republican baSiS; or the high, no
BILE Democratic free one? Again, for whose ben
eft was the Supreme Court talking mot decidne)
when wishing to place States upon an Cquai foot
! iay Was il for the benefit of those States ly-
ing under the Ordinance compact Did the Su-
preme Court think that we TaHted larger liber-
IT, and would not be free to introduce slavery
and involuntary servitude unless they should de-
clare The Ordinance of no force upon us Did
t&ty @ish 30 give the same degree of ttbrtnisn,
| that the worst States claim for themselves? Did
| they declare this glorious Ordinance invalid, in
order 10 give a wider scope to do wrong? Ii
they did, we don't thank them for this gratutous
opinion. We ask not the privilege of making a
monarchy, an oligarchy, or a despotism. The
standard of equality, to which all should come we
| claim to be that high one laid down in the Ordi-
nance, and contemplated by the Constitution and
not that low one practiced by South Carolina,
and not contemplated by the Constitution.
had supposed the Ordinance of 1887 to be a
regular compact las It expresses itself between
the original States and the people of the Terri
tory, aud the States to be formed out of it, for
ever binding and unaterable, unless by common
consent | never knew, or heard of its being al
tered, or Of any attempt being made for that pur-
| pose, unless we refer to the attempt to suspend
its operation in Indiana for the purpose Of intro
ducng 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 by 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 10, and was
binding in express terms upon the States to be
formed out of this territory.
The peOple here, ia the Territory, did not
adopt the Constitution. The original States,
acting alone in making and adopting the Consti-
tuition, had no power to alter the Ordinance CON-
pact without the consent of the people of the
Territory. The Constitution was made by the
old States without attempting to set aside the Or
dinance They did not even insist that a new
from this territory, should be admitted upon con-
dition Of its giving up the Ordinance compact
On the contrary, they required conformity to the
Ordinance, and made that condition of admis-
sion. There is nothing expressed in the Consti-
tuition, by which the Supreme Court should come
to so miserable a conclusion as that, by adopting
the Constitution the Ordinance must be given
up nor Is there anything from which such
idea could be implied nor is there anything in
| At o.
the old Confederacy, which, in the nature of
things must make an utter conhction or incon-
sistency; 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, rs they stood at the making Of
both and had their provisions and spirit been
respected, and had our Government acted con-
sstently with both, there would now be no conflict
| in fact, and no necessity or excuse for the Su-
preme Court to say what they have said about an
! equal footing, by which | understand them to
mem simply an equal footing in despotism and in
| iquity.
The United States Constitution says that the
migration or importation of such persons as any
of the States nom eziding shall think proper to
admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress
| prior to the year lS0S.n-Sec. O. An |. This
looked like preventing any more territory or
States from becoming slaveholding The 0rdi-
nance of 1887 says, art. g. "There shall be
neither slavery nor involuntary servitude 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
Safes such fugitive may he lawfully reclaimed
| &c" Now these two instruments, Ordinance and
Constitution, almost simultaneous in tn cir making
and adoption looked to the fact that there was to
be no more slave States or slave territory That
is a fixed position, with cypress language that
cannot be gainsayed by any intelligent, honest,
unprejudced court The words Original
States" in the Ordinance, and States now exist
ing" in the Constitution, show that in this re-
spect an effort was made to have both instruments
consistent with each other And these facts to-
gether with the provision leaving Congress the
power after 1903 TO cut off the slave trade, show
that 1t was expected not only TO 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 vein of slavery, in
the old States, rs soon as 1908 should come
| round.
| The Constitution of the United States was
made fair instrument on its face and its aaai-
| ard, in conformity TO which old States and new
States admitted should be placed on an fgual foot.
| mg was simply that of Republcanism, in contra
distinction to monarchy, oigarchy, sristocracy,
or absolutism and this Republicanism had its
meaning, in the minds of our Revolutionary fore
fathers, Ms in conformity to the principles of the
| Declaration of independence, but not according
to the meaning attached to that word by old Eng
land or by South Carolina 1t is libel upon
our forefathers. II is untrue to the common nc
ceptation Of that word TO say that South Carolina
conforms TO the standard Of Repubicanism as
meant to be understood by our Constitution
The Declaration of independence and the prin-
ciples avowed in it, the Constitution and its guar
antics for liberty, the Ordinance and its prohibit
ton of slavery, and the power given Congress to
prevent the extension Of slavery into new States
all go to show what standard of Republicsnsm
and equality our fathers had reference to-
But, according to the volunteered dictum OF
our great Supreme Court, if any State shall in
troduce despotism and have owa all the rest
in the State, M goods chattels and thmgsor shall
make complete oligarchy in substance or shall
make even monarchy in substance, but call it a
| Republc-and have King, but call him Gouern-
or-or have an auiocrat, yet call him another name
a Republican or Democratic name, If you please
why, then, every other State must have the same
right to do the same things, in order to be on an
"equal footing" with this one State under the Con-
stitution. This done, every compact that stands in
the way of such equal footing must be declared
invalid. We do not thank the Supreme Court
for gratuitously attempting to give us such dam.
nable liberty or license to introduce slavery into
our fair State, and thereby In time have a mmori-
" own the majority like beasts We ask no such
downward, devilisn equality. We would not es-
teen 1t favor
The truth is, the Supreme Court sees, with
this Ordinance in the way, that we are not bound
TO deliver fugitives from service to any but the
original States. Hence the necessity of avoiding
this inconyenient, fundamental, orever-binding
compact In doing 80, they give our standard Of
equal footing the libertne's range, the pirates
privilege. Sage men their decision will render
them famous as great and profound jurists, as in
corruptibe liberty loving men, governed by the
| safe rule Of strict construction AGAINST slaxerx