The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-01-24


and however acquired, in which Slavery might
exist at the time Of acquisition. This inter
probation was tacitly admitted and under the
compromise, thus interpreted, Arkansas, Tex
as, and Florida, came into the Union as slave
States, and the small remainder of the territory
south of Sc 30/ was allotted to slaveholding
Indian tribes.
"All the territory south of the Missouri line.
whether acquired before or after the date &C
the compromise was thus incorporated into
slave States, or otherwise appropriated to Sla.
very, under the slavehOldiug Interpretation Of
the compact Nothing was left to Freedom.
or settlement by non-slaveholdiug ireemen.
/ except the territory north of the Missouri line.
The freedom of this territory, it was thought,
was firmly secured. Guaranteed by the Con
stitution, protected by original policy. guarded
by n compact, in the fulGlment of which so
much had been yielded that it seemed impos-
sible for Slavery itself to ask more, the people
OF the free States never dreamed that it could
be invaded or endangered. But this anticipa-
ton proved ilusory. When the time arrived
for the organization of government for this
territory with a view to open it for settlement;
and cultivation, the country was astounded by
the demand of the Slave Power for the abroga-
ton of the Missouri prohibition.
/" AT first, the demand was heard with incred.
ulous amaZement, and then with unavaing
Indignation. 1t avaied nothing TO appeal to
phghted faith nothing to appeal to ancient
policy or constitutional guarantees. The great
/ dominant power of Slavery demanded the sac
| rlhce of Freedom, and the obation must be
made. The Missouri Prohibition was repeal
ed; the Compromise of 1920, performed TO tho
letter, and far beyond the letter, by the free
States, was broken up and destroyed by the
slave States, to avoid the fulhlmeut of its only
stipulation in favor of Freedom
The pretences under which this wronr was
perpetrated give additional keenuess To the
sense of injury. 1t was boldly asserted thai
the prohibition was unconstitutional. The
power TO prohibit Territorial Slavery had been
exercised by the first Congress under the Con
stltution, in the act providing for continuing in
full effect the Ordinance Of 1857 The Consti
tuition, in express TERMS had conferred on Con-
gress the power TO make all needlul rules and
regulations concerning the territory OF the Uni
/ ted States. This provision had been uniform
| ly regarded as authorizing all necessary Terri
! torial legislation. Almost every Congress had
exercised the power, and almost every Presi-
dent had approved its exercise. The very per
sons who denied the power to prohibit Slavery,
asserted the power to establish Territorial Gov
ernments, and to define their departments and
powers, and therefore, in denying the power Of
! prohibition, were reduced to the necessity of
denying that the greater includes the less
" UnGer these circumstances, after the pro.
hlbihon had remained unquestiOned for more
than the third of a century, the denial of itS
constitutionaity rather provoked Indignation
than excited doubt.
1t was also insisted that the doctrine or
popular sovereignty required the repeal of the
prohibition. This was a mere abuse of terms.
The true idea of popular sovereignty demands.
90 i
ton Of inalenable personal rights. There can
be no genuine popular sovereignty where a por.
ton OF the population is ensaved. The pro.
hibtlon OF Slavery is therefore necessary pre-
requisite to the real sovereignty Of the people.
In the sense of the apCloeistS for repeal. popu-
lar sovereignty signifies nothing but the RIGHT
OF portion Of the community TO eu,laye the
rest. 1t begins by the denial of the natural
rights of man. IL must end in the total sub
T pe6pa, at R @s5H d erpcie Of Amer
masters, dependents, and slaves
"Such is the repusive theory. Tn practical
operation, it has not proved more attractive.
As embodied in the Nebraska Kansas bin. II
has been fruitful of nothing but evil 1t has
not conferred single substantial benefit upon
the settlers of either Territory. In no respect
are they distinguished from the settlers of Min
neSota, where Slavery is prohibited. EXCEPT by
the Nebraska-kansas act upon the Territories
organized under it, is TO open them To the in
PRODUCTION OF slaves In one them II has lei
to desperate attempts TO effect that Obiect-to
INVASION, usurpatiOn, violence. bloodshed-al
most to civil war. Crimes like these are not
the legitimate fruits OF that doctrine of popular
selfgovernment, to the maintenance Of which
our fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes.
and their honor.
In all these things, our own State has a
deep and peculiar interest. Our own history
furnishes the most complete yindication of the
policy of Slavery prohibition. We occupy. i'm
part, the soil protected from the blight of Slave
ry by the Ordinance Of 1857. For more than
half century, the people of Ohio have been
accustomed to regard that Ordinance with min.
gled emotions of gratitude and pride. Con
splcuous among its provisions. and in fit com
partnership with its sacred guarantees of reli.
gious freedom, Of liberality towards immigrants.
of the inyiolability of private contracts, Of the
security OF private property, and Of universal
education, stands the great interdict against
Slavery, acknowledging and impartially pro
tecting the rights Of man as man. The words
to which we always recur when seeking in the
Ordinance the peculiar springs Of our wonder
full prosperity and progress, are those which
embOdy this prohibition.
"Never did the noble pioneers who laid the
foundations on which we now iovfully build
complain OF that interdict as an abridgement OF
any rights, personal or political. On the con
trary, they have ever spoken Of IL as the pillar
of fire by night and Of cloud by day, which
guided and protected them in the wilderness.
More than any other State, Ohio, as the first
born of the Ordinance, and indebted To the Or
dinance for her proud position as the third
State of the Confederacy, and first among tho
new States, is bound to cherish and defend its
great and benefcent principles. In so doing.
we shall be ieow-workers with its ilustrious
trainers, in their own declared policy and pur
pose of extending the fundamental principles
of civil and religions liberty, wherein these re-
publics, their laws and constitutions are erected
and fixing and establishing those PRINCIPLES A
the basis of all laws, constitutions, and govern.
ments, which forever hereafter shall be formed
in American territory
than this
The question Of Slavery, it is almost univer.
sally conceded, transcends in present Importance
all other political Questions of a national char
acter. The repeal of the Missouri Prohibition.
abrogating the Missouri Compromise. opens
anew the whole subject of the relations of Sla-
very to the Union, to the States, and to the Ter
rltorles. In determining the true line of duty,
under these circumstances, it seems to be the
part OF wisdom to recur to the acts of the found
ers OF the Republic, and to the principles of the
Constitution. TO me, these guides seem TO in
dictate plain path. 1t leads back to the orig.
inal National policy. That policy have al
ready remarked, while it sanctions no outside
interference with Slavery within slave States,