The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1855-11-14

to operate there, but vas overthrow and
tramplcd under foot By the British govern
ment. 1t is a anatter % historical record,
and will not be denied by any intelligent
man, that slaves were forced upon Virginia
agGinst her will,-nay against her remon-
strances, by the parent government, aud
thus slave holding hterest was created |
which ovcrmatched &c anti slavery feeling
and the result is. whal we now witness.-
The famous 'Ordinallse Of 1897 is contin-
ually in the mouth Of ofant.slayery men, as
an infallible antidole ainst The extension
of slavery and they nourn and lament that
the same prohibition eennot be applied by
Congress all the nAional territories not
yet organized into sta5es. Look now at the
practical effect Of thai Ordinance compared
with the principle of &c Nebraska Law
Under de Ordinancspf 1887 slavery was
introduced into Indiasa, and continue to-
Increase there, until 81 the erection Of those
Territories into states the principle of the
| Nebraska Law was eAbodied in their Con-
stitution, after which it gradually abated
and is now extinct.
"To be more particular. In 1870. three
years after the passage of the Ordinance
of l791 there were.np slaves in Indiana,
thsnco uprising whasis now Indiana and
Illinois. In 500 Tie number was l25.--
] In 1909 Illinois wasset off into a seperate
Territory. In l8l0nle number of slaves
/ in Indiana thus curtaged, had ipcrsased to
237, while in Illiaoissthe number was l68.
4 Indiana was erectedNnto State in 1916,
Illinois in 1918. Bgthat change, popular
sovereignty took theDla Of the Ordina nee
Of 1897 What was the consequence
Why this: That the namber Of slaves in In
diana four years afteF the change, to wit,
in 1920 was reduceagto l90-in 1880 to 3,
and in 1850 10 0. And this also; that the
number Of slaves inIlnois, which in 1880
1.-TWO years af er thechange) was GIT, was
in 1880 reduced to IA in 1910 to 33l, and
IN $50 to 0. Such4s the operation oil pop
ular sovereignty upon the system of slavery
contrased with the prohibitory Ordinances
of 1887. Popular sovereignty is the lead
ing principle of the Nebraska Law,--the Or.
dinance of 1887 is the same as the Wilmo
Provi,o Which do you p-efef, reader?
What made California fee state? The
principles of the Nebraska Law, ala 6 popu
lar sovereignty. Nothing else. Congress
had no hand IN tie business. California
formed State Constitution such as her peo
] pie approved, and tprohibited Slavery.
f "Agreat fuss was made by the'friends of
$ freedom as they called themselves, becaus
Utah and New Mexico on being organized
into Territories. in 1850 were authorized t
: have slavery, or not, as they pleased. Blu
what harm has 1t done? How many slave
! are there in either Territory? or in both OF
o them, or in both Of them together? Prob.
| ably not 80; and these will be set free
long time sooner than if tkoy had remain
i ed in the States from which they came
GA still greater uproar was made becaus
!. Kansas and Nebraska were erected int
= territories on the same basis as Utah ant
% Mexico. B lrrels Of sermons, we have NJ
4 donbt, have been preached against th'
e measure, and its movers and support ers hav
been denounced up bill and down. Bu
,s what harm has it done? Does anybod
"a NOW believe that either Of these territorie
- are to become slave holding states? Yer
al few, certainly; and the number is fast d
NJ minishing. The only danger Of such a re
- suit has been occasioned by the Abolition
+. Emigrant Societies; which by putting fort
i. great swelling words of vanity started up
- counter movement in Missouri, of violen
and disgraceful character, whereas, if the
had been con'elt to trust the people an
the free working of the Nebraska Law, tn
ly M issourians we have no doubt would hav
he done 50 too. However, call is wen tht
ed ends WE'LL" We may therefore sum up th
~ achievements of popular sovereignty, ;
r. embodied in the Nebraska Law, within th
st last six years, in the following manner:
n Snuare Miles