Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1855-07-14
aas. z.a.sss ~. :: .,.ss,z:
The North and its "Rielsfs /"

citizens of The Free States would exanin
e The slavery question in the spirit Of patric
. tie inquiry; would take an ntroverSivc sur
sev: would look ba ok and see What as t
slavery, they have claimed as rights; an
at the present and see what they hav
parted with which they could justly ca
their own.
When the frsi NJ issouri question al os
t III 1919, the North claimed that Congress
J had the constitutional power delegated to
: to insert restrictive condition as to slave
RS in an act admitting a State into fht
I Union; il elaimta a right TO impose a PER
pet'al prohibition on sovereign State
!. and this was embodied III motion mad,
Deb, 1879 in CONGRESS. to prohibit HI
State Of Missouri from further into
duriion OF slavery or involuntary servi
! tude.' In public meetings, in Legislative
resolves in the press, the North planted
itself on this propositions; aaH il was pres
sing this that shook the Union to its cen
tire. This statement cannot be deuied with
any truth.
Did the North act right and just in IA
king this positioh We do not propose
} now to go over ,i,e argument that, hey ond
a question, demonstrates that this alleged
light was no rigllt--that Congress had 10
such power; and to show how the impo-
sition of such condition of restriction
violates the basis principle of STATE EQUAL
IrF on Which our country was formed
and our Constitution established For Tor
t, two wears, from 1776 to 1919, this prin-
Eciple had been sacredly respected: Lut then
the North CHARMED that it had the right to
commence the work of recognizing Two
kinds Of States; inferior and superior States.
This claim was resisted.
instead of argument we propose to acc
duce the answer to our question which
many ilIustrious men haze given; tlen
whose fame is the most precious heir loom
to the Ren ublie, hose words are in the
spirit OF the former days. t
President IefIerson's letters abound with
sleunnciaiions o. the principle of such a
Restriction oasi State; and he contends that
"the regulation OF different conditions OF
men composing State" is Certainly the
exclusive, Igh. Of every State. which nolh-
ing in the Constitution has taken tor,
them and eiYen 70 .he General Govern.
ment.o President Madison was in cor
resfonaeaee with President Monroe in
1876; was decided IS 70 the unconstitu'lon.
atty Of the Missouri restrictions; and ceun-
sellea the President in a proposed veto OF
I the restrictions, AND egen after the ferriieYi-
al restriction OF the line IS deg. so min.
was adopted. wrote, Il must own that
have always leaned to the belief that the
restriction Missouri 36 deg. 80 min. Iine)
was not within the true scope Of ibe Con.
stitliion.''
President Monroe, in l8~3 prepared
veto message, stii cxtant to be sent into
Congress against the very Missouri State
restriction which the whole North was
demanding. Tie states in letter Deb. 10,
1920 that he should send il in case the
ball passed, aud says. "A,y decided opin.-
ION Is, that all the States comprising our
Union, new as well as old, must have equal
rights, eeding 10 the General Government
an equal Share Of power, and retaining TO
themselves the like; that they cannot be
incorporated into the Union on different
principles or conditions" The proposed
veto message celebrates these positions.
President John @. Adams was the Sec.
rotary OF State when the restriction on
Missouri was proposed. /! is to his praise
J as "a law-ahiding and Constitution loving
! citizen that, when the ianatieal cry of s.no
more slave States in iSl9-'20 went
! through the North. he wrote against the
restriction in the journals; that in 1886
when the a boii;ionists sent to Inn their
petitions against tile admission Of Arkan-
sas, he said in Congress: Il cannot consi;-
tently with my obligations as citizen of
the United States, and bound by cath to
support the Constitution, cannot object
to the admission Of Ar!ansas as a slave
State, | cannot propose OF agree 10 make a
condition that a Convention Of her ei,i.
Gems still expunge this a.,icle Slavery
clause from her Constitution"
| President Jackson, in letter in 1890,
indignantly denounced the restriction pro-
posed on the State of Missouri as trash,
despotic act, and shuddcred for the con-
sequences" and in hi. farewell address
says that "each State has uaquvstionsoly
the right to regulate its own concerns ac
cordiDg to It's own pleasure.
President Harrison claimed to be the
only public man in OHIO who opposed
4 W HAY \io~ liz t'ulSu III u itttS. thc
wild and dangerous sentiments prevalent"
! opposed the RESTRICTION as unconstitutional
land stated thai the general GoVrrnmeut
had no power " hatevcr to interiors in this
matter, and that to have slaves or no slaves
depended upon the people ofeach State
! alone"
President Taylor, in his California
message, declared that any attempt to de-
ny to the people Of the State the right OF
self so.eEaneIt in "A matter VI ieh pecui-
afly affects themselves would iniaIll5ly
be regarded by them ASIAN invasion OF
their nehlsl and upon the principles laid
down in our Declaration Of Independence
/ they will certainly be sustained by the
great mass Of lie American people.
/ Gen. Sam Hauston Feb, s, lS50.) in
/ the Senate, said NOR do ! believe that
Congress has. under the Constitution, any
authority to impose upon States, asking
for admission into the Union, any condi
ton whatever, other than that Of having
4 a Republican form Of Government.
John G. Calhoun, beyond doubt. ex.
pressed the united voice of FIFTEEN. at
least, ofthe sovereign States Of this Union
when, in his 1S47 resolutions, he avowed,