The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1854-05-12
LOUIS 0. COWAN, Editor and Proprietor

gitlye slave recovery CLAUSE uuucu W u ,
the constitution could not have been formed
without its recognition Of slavery in the
States which chose it, and the guaranty Of
the right 10 recover slaves fleeing into the
free States the Missouri controversy could
not have been settled without partition OF
Louisiana between free and slave soil ; and
that partition could not have been made
without the addition Of the same clause for
the recovery of fugitive slaves.
Thus, all three compromises are settle
ments Of existing questions, and intended
to be perpetual They are all three OF equal
moral validity. The constitutional compro-
mise is guarded by higher obligation in
consequence of its incorporation in that in
strument; but it in no way differs from the
other two in the circumstances which in
duced it, the policy which guards it, or the
consequences which would dow from its alb
rogation. a proposition 10 destroy the slav-
cry compromises in the constitution would
be an open proposition to breakup the I'm.
ion; the attempt to abrogate the compro.
misses OF 1877 and 1920 would be virtual at
tempts to destroy the harmony Of the I'm
ion, and prepare Il for disslution, by destroy.
ing the confidence and affection on which it
is founded.
The Missouri Compromise of 1920 is a
continuation of the ordinance OF 1857 its
extension to the since acquired territory
West Of the Mississippi, and no way differ
ing from it either in principle or detail. Tho
ordinance of 1887 divided the then territory
of the United States about equally between
the free and slave States the Missouri Com
promise line did the same by the additional
territory of the United States as it stood in
1920; and in both cases it was done by act
OF Congress, and was the settlement OF o
difficulty which was to last forever. | con-
slider them both, with their fuSitive.slave.
recovery clauses, and the similar clause in
the constitution, as part and parcel OF the
same transaction - different articles in tho
same general settlement.
Thus the three measures are one, and the
ordinance Of 1887 father Of the other two.
1t led to the adoption OF the fugitive slave
clause in the constitution, and we may say,
to the formation of the constitution itself,
which could not have been adopted without
that clause, and the recognition OF slave
properly in which il was founded. This vi
ta fact results of itself from the history Of
the case. In March OF the year 1874, the
Virginia delegation in the then Congress OF
the confederation, headed by MIR. Jefferson
and Mr.. Monroe, conveyed the Northwest.
ern territory to the thirteen United States.
In the month of April ensuing, the organic
ing mind Of Mr.. Jefferson, always bent upon
systems and administration, brought in an
ordinance for the government of the territory
so conveyed, with the anli.slavery clause as
u part of it, to take effect in the year 1900 ;
but without q clause for the recovery OF
fugitive slaves. For the want Of this pro-
vision the anti-slavery clause was opposed
by the slaveholdng States, and rejected /;
and the ordinance was passed without it,
In July Of the year 1897, the ordinance was
re.moddellcd, the anti.slaye cause, with the
fugitive slave recovery clause, as they now
stand, were inserted in it; and in the shape
of an ordinance had the unanimous vote OF
every State present - eight in the whole -
and an equal number Of slave and free States
present. Thus, it is clear that the anti.
slavery clause in the ordinance of 1857 could
not have passed without the fugitive slave
recovery clause annexed. They were in
separable in their birth, and must be so in
their life; and those who love one must
accept the other. .... -.
This was done in the month Of July, in
the city of New York, where the Congress
Of the confederation then sat. The Nation.
al Convention was sitting at the s,me time
in the city of Philadelphia, at work upon
the federal constitution. Two bodies were
in constant communication with each other,
and some leading members, (as MIR. Madi.
son and general Hamlton) were members oil
each, and attending by turns in each. The
constitution was finished in September, and
received the fugitive slave recovery clause
Immediately alter its insertion in tho ordi-
nance. 1t was the work Of the same hands,
and at the same time, in both instruments
and it is well known that the constitution
could not have been formed without that
clause. . 'I'.. D.
Thus the compromise clause in tue ordi'
nance is father to the compromise clause In
the constitution and the Missouri Compro.
mise results from both and all three stand
before US as founded in the same circum'
stances, induced by the same considerations,
and directed by the same policy = that OF
the peace, harmony and pcrpetuily of this
Union. In point of moral obligation l con-
slider them equal, and resulting from conti.
tons which render them indispensable. Two
of them have all the qualities of compro-
mise - those Of the ordinance and OF the
constitution. They are founded in agree
ment = in consent - in compact and are
as sacred and inviolable as human agree
ments can be. The third one = that OF the
Missouri antislavcry line = was not made
upon agreement. ''..
MISSOURI COMPROMISE IMPOSED DY SOUTHERN
.. VOTES. '.g u
1t vas imposed by votes by the South
upon the North = resisted by the North at
the time = acquicsced in afterwards and
by that acquiescence became a binding COW
enant between two parties; and the more
so on the South because she imposed it.
repeat /: it was an imposition, not a compact.
The South divided and took choice and
now j: will no, do to claim the other half on
the ground Of the original dissatisfaction OF
the other party. Brothers cannot divide an
estate IN that way - one make tho division,
and take choice, aud afterwards claim the
other half. The South has her half
She gave it away once pave 1t to Spain
and the North helped her TO get it back,
even at the expenco Of war = without
suspccting that she was strengthening
the South TO enable it 10 take the other
half. But this attempt does not come from
the South, and finds resistance there. q.
THE RESULT or AN iTTEMPT TO REPEAL
THE COMPROMISE OF 1887.
This brings us to the question of repeal
or abroga,ion Of these compromises. The
one in The constitution canno, be got rid ol
without an amendment, 10 that instrument,