The weekly Lancaster gazette. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1852-1855, 1853-07-14

piled for administration as a State. Up to
this time, over FIVE years after the treaty,
this territory remains free, and there is no
reasonable prospect that twill ever be any
thing else.
So far, then, the wish OF the Wing Con-
yention of '4S has been obtained. But II
was not done by the passage of an ordin.
ance forbiddng slavery there. We all re-
member the violent debates and angry
speeches made in Congress on this subject
prior to the passage Of the Compromise
measures. tits not necessary in this ar
ticle to recapitulate them. The danger of
a dissolution of the Union, if the North had
insisted upon the passage of such restric-
ton, was imminent. Northern statesmen
saw that California aud New Mexico would
remain free territory, at all events, and that
the only advantage of passing such meas
ure would be the mere adoption of an alb
stract idea, while it would be humilating
victory over the South, and seriously en-
danger the permanence Of the Union, with
out accomplishing any practical good. They
yielded the vote on the subject, while they
secured the end, by the act Of the people OF
California and Mexico.
Here are the two great points upon which
debate has arisen. In the acquisition oil
Texas the South triumphed, but by the vote
of such men as Allen and Tappan, and the
Locofocos Of the North.
In the question of slavery in the Mexican
territory, there is substantah triumph oi
the north. We repeat, these have been the
two great points upon which the slavery
discussion has turned, and in each the Wing
party has been uniformly on the side o
freedom and free territory. There is moth.
ing in the present aspect of affairs that
would induce us to believe it would act diff
ferently to-day, if the emergency should a
gain arise.
We say that the Wing party of Ohio has
mol changed grounds on the slavery question
1t remains whore it has stood for years past
tbs opposed to the extension of slavery
over territory now free. The questions up
on which the people have been called tc
act are legitimate questions Of action
There is no constitutional provision declar.
ing that we shall annex other territory if
our people desire it, There is nothing in
the con nstitution to prevent Us saying tha
slavery and involuntary ssrvitude shall no
exist in our territories. On these point
each m an must determine for himself. Blu
there is constitutional provision for the de
livery offugitive slaves to their master. =
Thatprovision isjust as binding upon US as
any other p irt Of that instrument. Itis mo-
a question of ex?eliency, for the determine
tion of our private judgment, but compact
an agree nent, made by our fathers in Con
vention, with George Washington as its
President, and solomnly sanctioned by the
people of all the States in their capacity o.
voters at the polls. We may not like it,
We may not feel that our wise forefathers
made great mistake by agreeing to it. We
may desire to expunye itfrom the consttu
ton, but, So long as It's there, and we are
American citizens, we are bound By it, an,
cannotrefuse to respect and obey it, withou
Ia departure from the duty that all good re
publicans owe to the laws of their land.
And herein consists the grand difference
between the position of the Freesoilers to
day, and the Whig party in past years
While we opposed slavery and slave ex
tension, we violated no clause af the con
stitution, no law or duty we owed to thj
Government. We have endeavored to poin
out and explain that difference, and WI
think it cannot fail of being understood b!
minds ofordinary comprehension.