Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-04-14

pies of the north may be respected, and justice
at the same time secured to the south. In the
event of friendly dissolution, the rule of d.
vision would probably be in proportion to fede-
raj representation, Notwithstanding its mani
fest injustice, because the south would have
only to emancipate, or even to apprentice their
slaves, and it would confessedly have claim to
two-fifths larger proportional or if the Terri
tories be sold, the proceeds are divided pro
rata according to federal representation, mot
withstanding the glazing injustice of deducting
from the south two-ffths, and giving them to.
the NORTH in addition to their own share, and
at the same time under direct taxation, taxing
to the full value the whole fye-ffths of the
slave population at their full value as laborers,
and exempting entirely from taxation the whole
labor Of the north, black and white, and allow
ing them full representation Yet, with these
cruel inequalities, it may be supposed the north
would be content to divide, without seeking,
under the cover of sentiment, to reap a richer
harvest for their virtue.
If these divisions in the first of the above
instances acould be made, and in the second
has been made, why could not third now be
made to avert so many threatened disasters,
such inevitably bitter discords, by agreeing, as
matter of equity, that the south should draw
line dividing all territory into two parts leay-
ing the selection to the north, or that the north
should draw the line of division, leaving the
selection to the south?
If however, from any cause, such division
should seem inexpedient, should not the near
est possible approach be made to some such
settlement? Can there be any mode SO little
liable to objection as the one proposed in the
Nebraska bill, which is simply that the parties
who are to reside in the Territories, whose in
terests are alone at stake, should have the right
to determine their own condition and their own
views of interest? Even this arrangement-as
have been, without exception, all others-is
cession by the south to northern exactions;
for it would appear that the Constitution
plainly required enactments to protect and Sc
cure slave property, SO that it could not be
taken from them without their consent; and
yet they submit to have their slaves enamel
pated, ifthose of the residents, being MAORI
ty, not owning slaves, shall say SO.
This power in a sovereign State to strip
classes of citizens of their property without
compensation, if it exists rightfully at all, is
never exercised except at the expense of slave
holders. No other property is ever taken from
class.
None of its opponents have grappled with
the naked question. None have attempted to
demonstrate that there would be any wrong
committed, if the bill should pass unanimous
ly-that any moral guilt would attach to either
the Representatives in Congress or their con-
stituency at home; that there is any aspect of
it which aggrayates the wrong of slavery, sup
posing slavery to be wrong, or that in any way
it wrongs any one spiritually or temporarily.
If, as we allege, it harms no one, then how
shameful and unjust is opposition TO this bill,
from which, in all probability, no change of
residence will flow If anything further were
needed to show the wantonness of this opposi-
ton, it is in the fact revealed by the census
tables, that the streams Of migration flow on
parallels Of latitude; that the north goes west
on its own parallel in an almost unbroken col
umn; the middle and southern States following
the same law of nature. This fact alone should
suffice as guaranty against slavery in that
latitude, if it were right to prevent it. and any
guaranty were necessary. wv
We close for the present with the distinct
allegation of our conviction, that if the right
and merit of the measure be we'll understood,
the opposition would dwindle to interested par
ties and crazy fanatics. But alas, the north
uW not look at both sides Of the question.