The Belmont chronicle, and farmers, mechanics and manufacturers advocate. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1848-1855, 1854-08-11

he institution Of Slavery in the Territories.
That act was passed without any unusual
l,nount of debate.
Seven Slave States were admitted into the Union |
,rior to 1920, under the New Constitution.
This is about of piece with the rest OF his
lrticle--thut is, untrue. We would be ex-
remoly obliged to Mr.. Democrat If he would
give US the names Of the sepen Slave States
alluded to above. We never heard Of more
than four, in all Of which Slavery existed
prior to their coming in as States. Those
four were Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana,
and Alabama. If there are any more our
history is at fault for it does not mention
them.
lie STYLES the Missouri Compromise Act
ga usurpation of power on the part of Con-
gress"-"a polpable violation Of the Con-
stitution." &c. Now we had better opinion
of Mr.. Democrat than to suppose that he
would sit tamely for hirty:tour gears, while
a "palpable violation Of the Constitution" "ex-
listed as an act of Congress. The press has
been free and open since that-the rostrum
has been standing, and either of these plans
offered excellent opportunity for him to ex-
pose this "palpable violation Of the Consti-
tuition" 1t has, notwithstanding, been ac-
quiesced in by men Of all parties, North and
South, as a wholesome, and strictly legal
compromise. HENRY CLAY was the father
of that Compromise, 80 to speak. Aye, and
the little Illinois giant IL December, 1851,
said it was "fair, Just and honorable" If it
was such alpable violation OF the Con-
stitution" why have the patriotic men of all
parties allowed it to remain! Why allow a
thing to disgrace their regulations for states
manship if it is so palpabiy wrong!
But here follows the monster misrepresen-
tation:--
1t wns cxactcd by the fanatcal North, and aequi-
esced in by the patriotic South, choice OF evils
"a dissolution Of the Union curtaiIment OF their
constitutional rights This was the first cornpro-
mise since the foundation OF the government con
flicting with the Constitution The first aggression
OF the North upon the South, Inc flrst outrage re-
suting from seciionalism The first demonstration
OF the intoleran, proscrptive spirit of fonaticsm--
its utter disregard OF constitutional Obligations, when
antagonistic to its mad schemes.
Now that paragraph is simply false, as we
shall Immediately proce ed u show from the
record. CHARLES PINcKYEY, a Southern men,
Der of Congress at the time of the passage Of
the Missouri Compromise act, wrote to a
friend Immediately on its passage, as follows:
CoSGREss HALL, March ., 1920, O'Clock at night
DEAR SIR: | hasten to inform you that
this moment we have carried the question to
admit Missouri, and all Louisiana to the
southwark of 36 o 80, free of tie restriction
of slavery, and glue The South, IN a short time
an addition Of sir, and perhaps eight, members
10 the Senate Of the United States. 1t Is con-
sidered here by the slaveholding States as
a great triumph. The votes were close
ninety to eighty-six, the vote was so first
declared l-produced by the seeding and
absence oe few moderate men from the
North. To the north of SO 80 there is to
be, by the present law, restriction, which you
will see, by the votes, Voted against But
it is at present of no moment it is a vast
tract, inhabited only by savages and wild
beasts, in which not foot of the Indian claim
to soil is extinguished, and in which, accord
ing to the ideas prevalent, no land office will
be open for great length of time.
With respect, your obedent servant,
CHARLES PINCKNEY.
That shows pretty conclusively that it was
neither demanded by the "proscriptive spirit
of ranaticism" nor wanted by the NORTH
But we have better authority still. By ref
erence to the vote on the question it will be
seen that, different state OF affairs prevail
ed from what Mr.. Democrat supposes. In
Niles Register we find that but t,co Southern
Senator's uoted against that Bill, and but four
Northern Senator's uoted for IL, Does that
SAVIOR of being demanded by the "proscriptive
spirit of fanaticism" We consider that the
best kind of evidence in support of our
position--the actual vote OIL it. Talk to our
venerable and worthy felow-citzen, Judge
RUGGLEs OF the Missouri Compromise being
demanded by "Northern fanaticism"-he
knows that such is not the fact--he knows
that he and his Northern colleagues resi- sted
the passage Of that Act because they con-
sidered i a compact in which the North
would be wronSed' But from your own party,
even the Democrat" party of 1854 we will
condemn you. In colSmunlcation which
we find in the Columbus Statesman y Demo
crat, and which, the editor says was written
by "one of the most consistent and thorousse
going members of the Democratic party" we
find the following language:
The South having almost unanimously
united to repeal the Missouri Compromise,
which they as unanimously forced us first 10
accept, and under which they have been per-
mitted through the exertons and influence
of the ever reliable national men of the North
to appropriate their share of the Louisiana
purchase, with the express understanding the
North should not encounter their opposition
in giving all North of 36A deg. north latitude