Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1854-03-29

|
connected with the institution OF slavery have
been the never failing source Of sectional dis
agreement and Legislative contention. The
foundations of this Government have beer
threatened by its tlroes, and as often has re
pose been re established by the magic Of com
promise. 1t was compromised in the Con.
gress of the Confederation, and opened agai,
in the Federal Convention. After elicilna
much oil eloquence, and much Of patriotism
it was seemingly settled hy the adoption o
the Constitution, but again disturbed by the
acquisition of territory from France. Here
again the fires of discord were smotherec
over only to break out with liercer violence
upon the organization OF territory acquired o
Mexico.
Again the virtues Of compromise were in
voked, and with triumphant success whicl
was heralded forth to the world as specife
against the ills of State. But three shor
years have passed, and again the subject il
before us, with its extremes as thorough,
charged with oppusite qualities as before the
equilibrium had been created by the aid o
compromise. This rehearsal of the genera
history of the several compromises is made
to show that .here.i no manner of affinity
between slavery and:compromise. We are
warned by the past tof the entire insufficency
of compromise to secure inality of the sub
iect and submit that it is more manly, wis
er, and more honest, from henceforth to es
chew the word.
The question of slavery was legally set
tied when the States, which were then par
ties 10 the compact, ratified the Constitution
1t thereby became part and parcel of the
supreme law of the land, aud no graver leg
islative mistake, none so dangerous to the
South, or so embarrassing to the Constitu
tion.loving portion of the North, was evel
committed, as wbenthe stern letter of the
constitution was forgotten in the. delusive
attractions of hollow compromise.
But, sir were we, for the sake of argument
to admit the constitutionalily of the, act
known as the Missouri compromise, it would
not, in Justice, strengthen the positions o
The opponents of this hill In fact, it weak.
eus them, and exposes their entire insinceri
ty; because it is in proof Of record that the
very men who are crying out the bond the
bond! have, on every occasion and oppor
tunity, violated its spirit and meaning, and
in their interference with the slave.trade ii
the District of Columbia, and in the matte'
of California. the very bond itself. know
it will b. replied, lliatt the people Of Cali
fornia excluded slavery by their own consti
tuition; but the Journal Of this House vii
show, by the voting, which is therein recor
ded, that the price of her admissions was
the exclusion of slavery. Were we to grant
that the I" Missouri bond" las it is some
where caled,) was constitutional and fair
the opponents of this bill are stopped from
pleading it in the present issue, by the fac
that they themselves have uniformly disre
garded its provisions. II is, believe, uni
versalIy admitted principle of justice and oI
law, that in every dependent covenant fail
ure of performance by one Of the parties to
it releases the other from all obligations tc
its terms.
For upwards Of thirty years has the Soutt
acuuiesccd in this Missouri liue-which wa:
at first forced apon her by northern ma
iority-and not in a single instance have
we attempted to overleap it Believing tha
we would be excluded by natural laws
which, north of go 30', are adverse to the
proGtablenesss of slave labor, we became
reconciled to law which we knew TO bt
unconstitutional. Continually harassed al
most beyond endurance, we were willing
for the sake of quiet, to adopt this line as a
final settlement Of the question. Actuatet
by these considerations, we have made re
peated offers to extend the line to the Pa
cfc ocean-ofIers which vindicate our fideli
ty to the contract, and which, had they beer
accepted in The good faith in which the,
were rendered, might have given stability tt
the adjustment.
On the 10th August, ls4s, an amend
ment to the Oregon bill. then before tn
Senate, was offered, providing for the exten
sion of the compromise line to the Pacific
and passed that body, by a vote Of 33 yea
and 81 nays. The nays were:
"Messrs. Allen, Atierton, Baldwin, Brad
bury, Breese. Clarke, Corwin, Davis O
Massachusetts, Dayton, Dix, Dodge, Fect
Greene, Hale, Hamlim, miller, Niles, Phelp:
Upham, Walker, and Webster-2l."
The bill thus amended was sent to thi
House, and rejected by the Free-Soil vote
| which was unanimous against it.
, My immediate predecessor movedto amen
bill, originating in this House, which pre-
vided territorial government for Oregon
t and in which the Wilmot provso was incol
f porated, by declaring the effect that ina'
much as slavery was excluded from Orego
by operation of the law known as the Mi:
souri, Compromise, we were content to abid
/ by its terms; and it was promptly rejected
J; as insufficient for the purposes and design
: of Free Sellers.
S In 1850, when the bill for the admi issio
/. of California was before the Senate, NJ
f Davis, of Mississippi, moved to amend, b
j. making 36e 80 the southern boundary {
e the State; and it was lost-23 yeas, 8
\ nays.
u Amendments to the same effect wei
, subsequently twice offered; first by M
t Foote, of Mississippi, and again by MIR. Tu
d ney, of Tennessee, and both rejected. b.
S why multiply instancess | have referre
9 to but one which occurred in this Hous
y because we all know that for gears the on
/. hone of the South has been in the conserv
tism of the Senate. For upwards Of thir
n wears has the South, in observance of &
j. acquiescence unwisely yielded, submitted
# the insult Of an exclusion, and, by geogr
d phical line, from common territory, secu
d ed by common treasure; while the Ere