The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-11-08

| trality may be secured by remaining in some
| independent outside association. How long dc
| you think any considerable mass of American
| cltizens-enlightened open, manly, ardent, as
| they are-will be amused or interested in the
| mummeries of merely private, secret, selfish
bigoted, proscriptive cabal, and its stale de-
bates about the proper conditions of naturaliza
| ton, and the claims of adopted citizens to the
privilege of grazing the parades of the militia
on muster days, and the non-conformity of Cath.
| Ole clergy to the approved Protestant tenures
of churches and burying grounds, when the
| discussion of the great question, whether this
shall be land of Freedom or land of Slave
| ry, shall have actually begun, and every popu.
lar tribune is occupied When the sea is calm,
| light and fsnciful barks sport safely and
gaily on its surface, among its merchantmen
| and its ships of war. But when the storm king
lashes the waves, and they rise up to kiss his
| feet, the fanastical craft, no matter how broad
its streamers, or how sharp its keel, or how dex-
ferrous its navigator, suddenly disappears.
conclude, therefore, that you all, if not now,
yet soon enough, will take one side or the other
| IN this great controversy.
Which side? 1t will be the side on which
Justice, Equality, and Freedom, shall he found
| and, therefore, on which final success and tri-
| umph shall be found. Which side is thatY Even
| the mathematician cannot prove a selfevident
| truth in his science; nor can | demonstrate a
self-evident truth in politics. To assert that
| Justice, Equality, or Freedom, may be found on
the side of those who are laboring to fortify and
extend Slavery, is one of those paradoxes which
pensloned Error requires US to refute. | may be
able to illustrate its absurdity. Justice, Equal
ty, and Freedom, in political discussions, relate
| TO individual men and masses of men in the
state. The old Roman State consisted of mem
bers constituting three classes. lst. Patricians
or privileged citizens. I'd. Plebeans or I'M
privileged citizens. 3d. Slaves, equally held
by both Of the other classes. All the politics
OF that great and powerful people, whether of
peace or war, domestic or foreign, turned on
the ever-changing balances of these three class,
es, and chiefly On that of the two first. In the
United States, there are also three classes.
Shareholders, Non-slsveholders, and Slaves.
From the foundation of our system, and even
from an early period, in the Revolutionary
War itself, all American politics, whether of
peace or war, and whether domestic or foreign,
have mainly turned, as they are now conspicu-
ousy turning with the vibrations of the balan-
ces between these three classes, and chiefly
those of the balance between the two first.
Always the Shareholders, apprehensiye of dan
ger to property and pretsnsions anomalous and
obnoxious, seek to fortify themselves, with blind
disregard to the rights and interests of Non
shareholders. Always the Non Shareholders, hay-
ing an increasing consciousness that Slavery
in any degree is injurious to the State, and dan
gerous in proportion to its strength, seek to
counteract the policy Of the Shareholders by
diffusing the spirit of Freedom. The cause of
the Non-slaveholders is assumed by the Repub-
lican Party, and by no other party, sect, or fac
ton. On which side, then, may we expect that
Justice, Equality, and Liberty, will be found
The opposition, however, tell us they cannot
yet see that Shareholders may not possibly have
Justice on their side. Let us try to make the
matter. plain. Shareholders are men engaged
in the occupations of society, and they are a
power III the State. Non-slaveholders, using
only free labor are human also, and another
power in the State. Their systems clash, their
interests conflict, their ambitions conflict. The
one power strives to extend, the other to cir
cumscribe Slavery. The Republicans, by sue
cession, are the party who have opposed all the
political concessions which have hitherto been
made to Slavery. They opposed successfully
the introduction Of Slavery into the Northwest
Territory. They opposed, with partial success,
the extension of Slavery in the Territory &C.
quired from France. They opposed, with par
tial success, the extension of Slavery in the
State of Texas. They opposed, with partial sue
cess, the extension of Slavery in the Territory
obtained by conquest from Mexico. They op-
posed the abrogation Of the restriction in favor
OF Freedom contained in the Missouri Compro-
mise. They now demand the admission, not
only of free States, but also Of free States only,
into the American Union. The Shareholders
are the party by whose power and influence all
the engagements Of Slavery within the United
States have been made. On which side, then.
are Justice, Equality, and Freedom? Answer
me upon your honors and your consciences.
An Immediate issue involves the question
whether Kansas shall be rescued from ieop-
ardy of Slavery, aggravated perhaps by the hor
rors of civil war, and brought into the Union
as free State, notwithstanding the dereliction
of Congress and the treachery Of the President
of the United States. This issue is to be de-
tded by the present Congress, or possibly con-
tinued before the next Congress, under a new
Administration. The Republican Party are
committed to the rescue of Kansas 1t is not
just that Kansas shall be free State? Is il
not all inherent right of every community to be
free, if it desire to be so? What does YOUR
Declaration of independence mean, if it do not
mean that? Was not Freedom pledged to
Kansas III 1920, by the Shareholders themselves?
Was not that pledge surreptitiously and perfd-
iously broken in 1854, by the Kansas Terrific
rial act? Was not Freedom pledged even by
that act to the people of Kansas, if they should
desire to be- free? Is not even that pledge
! shamefully broken by the usurpation of the
Missouri shareholders? Let the Republican
Party prevail in this and in the next canvass,
and Kansas will become a free State Let the
Republican Party fail, and Kansas will inevita-
bly, be a slave State. On which side, then, are
Justice, Equality, and Freedom? Answer me,
as you will expect to answer at the bar of the
public opinion of mankind.
The sophists return TO the argument with
new and various dilemmas. They are not sat
is6ed that Congress had the power to enact the
restriction contained in the Missouri Compro-
mise of 1920. Grant that they had not. Yet
the people Of Kansas have the right now to
establish a free State. But Congress had con-
stitutional power to enact that restriction. 1t
was identical with the Ordinance of 1887. That
! Ordinance was established simultaneously with
the passing and adoption of the Constitution,
and successive constitutional Congresses have
ratified and confirmed it. Did not the states
men Of 1877 understand the constitutional
powers Of Congress?
Again: There is no part of the territory OF
the United States over which there is not pie
nary absolute sovereignty residing somewhere
Where does that sovereignty reside? In the
people OF the United States. By whom is the
legislative power OF that sovereignty exercised ?
By Congress alone. Congress can make all
"needful rules and regulations" concerning
the public lands and other property of the Uni
ted States The prohibition of Slavery was the
most needful of all rules and regulations. How
pitiful is the bubble built on criticism of the
terms of this grant, when the Constitution con
tains no other grant of legislative power over
the Territories, and the entire establishment OF
government in the Territories rests on this one
grant only
The opposition tell us, that if Congress could
prohibit Slavery in Territories. then they MIGHT