Washington sentinel., 1854-03-15

ing the first half of the nineteenth century.
Now anti-savery opinions are unknown at
the SOUTH and are certainly greatly modified
in the north since the formation OF our Con-
stitution. The lessons of British and French
emancipation in America have not been lost
upon the American people. Men have now
greater experience of the workings of emanci-
patton, and clearer conception Of the whole
subject, which has not redounded to the ad-
yancament of abolition ideas. The nineteenth
century has cast off many Of the follies of the
eighteenth, and this among others. | have
sought for the policy of our fathers, not in the
individual opinions of some of them, but in the
collective will of the whole society. We must
look to the Constitution and laws for this col.
lective will. They, and they alone, utter the
early policy, public policy of the republic
When we look to the Constitution, we find no
tislavery policy planted in that instrument.
On the contrary, we find that it amply provides
tor the perpetuity, and not the extinction of
slavery. It provides for the recapture and re-
turn OF fugitives from labor from every portion
OF the republic. 1t provides for additional
securities in the form of increased representa-
ton for slave property. 1t provides for the
suppression of insurrection among slaves, and
pledges the whole power of the republic for
that purpose. 1t provides for the increase of
their numbers, by the prevention of the sup
preston of the African slaye.trade for twenty
years, and permitting it forever. The history
of this last provision is worthy of special note.
Virginia and Maryland had forbidden the Afri-
can slave-trade at the time the Constitution
was formed, and North Carolina had greatly
tramelled it; yet the Constitution swept away
these restrictions, and compelled thoses States
to permit the slave-trade against their declared
policy; and this was done by the votes of New
England against Virginia and Maryland.
/ repeat, these clauses of the Constitution
provided for the perpetuity, and not the ex-
tinction Of slavery. Here the policy Of our
fathers was Enthusiastically written down, and
the writing cannot be perverted. There is not
a single clause in that instrument which pro-
vides for, or looks to the abolition or restric-
ton of slavery anywhere. 1t is undoubtedly
true that many Of the trainers of the Constitu-
ton, both from the north and the south, were
anti-slavery men. They freely proclaimed their
opinions but they planted none Of them in
the organic law, but left the whole subject to
be managed by those interested in it. There
fore, so far from its being true that the Consti
tuition localized slavery, it nationalized it and
it is the only property which it does ma
tionalize except the works of genius and art
In the face of these provisions ofthe Consti.
tuition, the Senator from Massachusetts Mr.
SUMNER continues to assert that the uniform
policy OF our fathers was opposition to slavery
The policy of the government after the forma-
ton OF the government, up to 1920, was equally
decisive against the statements of that Senator
He asserted, in a speech on this floor, two
years ago, and reiterated it as an important
fact, / think as many as three times, in his late
Speech that when President Washington took
the oath of Office, in 1889, the national flag
did not float over one inch of slave terrific
ry belonging to the national Union. / cannot
appreciate the Importance of the statement to
the argument, even if it were true; but as un-
important as it is, even that statement is un-
founded in fact. Before the Constitution was
formed, the Northwest Territory was ceded to
the United States, with prohibition Of slavery;
but at that very moment the United States
claimed and held large extent of territory in
the southwestern portion of the Union, which
was settled and occupied by slaveh holders,
under the protection of the flag Of the Union.
/ will explain its history in its order. That
senator, to make out his case, suppresses ma.
terial portion of the action Of the first Congress
under the Constitution. That Congress accepted
the cession of the Northwest Territory with
provision against slavery, and provided for its
governments; and the same Congress accepted
the cesson of Tennessee from North Carolina,
with provision protecting slavery, and pro.
vided for its government; extended the ordi-
nance Of 1887 over that cession and its terri
tory in the southwest, excluding the sixth and
last item, which was the anti.slavery clause of
that ordinance Therefore, if it had been true
that when Washington took the oath of Office
the American flag did not float over an inch
of slave territory belonging to the Union, he
and his first Congress soon altered this state Of
things, and hoisted the American flag over
slave territory larger than all Of the then free
States of the Union.
The ordinance of 1887 was declared by Mad
ison to be without shadow of Constitutional
authority; but the first Congress accepted
compact already made, with all of its provis-
ions and another compact with North Carolina,
with different provision in regard to slavery;
and protected both with the army and power
of the republic. Therefore it is not true that
the first Congress took pains to exclude sla-
very, or did in fact exclude it from single
inch of the public domain.
The next territorial act in the southwest was
that of 1898, over the country to which | have
referred. This territory was peculiarly situated.
After the peace of 1868, when Florida was
severed from Spain, and passed into the hands
of England, the boundary Of Georgia west of
Chattahoochee river was along the list parallel
of north latitude; but, upon the petition of the
Board of Trade Of London, representing that
the southwestern portion of the territory of
Georgia was too remote from the local govern
ment the British government altered the
boundary of Georgia by annexing all that por
ton of the State beginning at the mouth of the
Yazoo river, running due east to the Chatta-
hoochee, thence down that stream to the 3lst
parallel of north latitude thence west to the
and thence up the Mississippi to
the mouth of the Yazoo, to the territory of
West Florida. The boundary of Georgia stood
thus at the time Of the revolution; and, upon
the peace of 1888, Britain retroceded Florida to
Spain, leaving the territory before described
within the limits of the United States, but not
within the boundary of any State.
The general government therefore claimed,
and, in 1898, erected a territorial government
over it, extended the ordinance Of 1887 over it,
expressly excluding the sixth, or antslavery
clause of that ordinance,) This was the clear
est indication of national policy on this subject
l. A