Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1856-12-18


isting Jaws of the land, having tn
same popular designation and quaiit,
as compromise acts-nay, more, VIII
unequivocally disregarded and con
demned he most positive and obligatc
ry injunetions of the Constitution il
self, and sought by every meanswithi
their reach, to deprive portion {
their fellow-citizens of the equal Ell
joyment of those rights and privilege
guaranteed alike to all by the funda
mental compact of our Union.
This argument against the repeal
of the statute line in question, Was
accompanied by another Of copgenia
character, and equally with the forme1
destitute Of foundation in reason and
truth. 1t was imputed that the meas.
ure originated in the conception Of
extending the limits of slave labor be.
yond those previously assigned to it.
and that such was its natural as we'll
as intended effect; and these baseless
assumptions were made, in the north
ern States, the ground of unceasing
assault upon constitutional right
The repeal in the terms of statute
which was already obsolete, and also
null for unconstiutionality, could have
no influences to obstruct or promote
the propagation Of conflicting views
of political or social institutions
When the act organizing the Terrific
lies Of Kansas and Nebraska was
passed, the inherent effect upon that
portion of the public domain thus
opened to legal settlement, was to
admit settlLrs from all the States of
the Union alike, each with his convic-
tons of pubic policy and private
interest, there to found in their dis
cration. subject to such limitations as
the Constitution and acts of Congress
might prescribe, new States, here after
TO be admitted into the Union. 1t
was a free field open alike to all,
whether the statute line of assumed
restriction were repealed or not. That
repeal did not opeC to free COMPETE
tion Of the divers opinions and do
mcst;c institutions field, which with
cut such repeal, would have been
closed agiust them: it found that
field Of competition already opened
in fact and in law. All the repeal
did was to relieve the statute.book Of
an Objectionable enactment, unconsti-
tutiopal, in effect, and injurious in
terms to a large portion of the
States.
Is it the fact that, IN all the unset.
tied regions of the United States, if
emigration be left free to act on this
respect for itself, without legal prohi-
bitions on either side, slaye-labor will
spontaneously be every where, in
preference to free labor? Is it the
fact, that the peculiar domestic insti-
tutions of the Southern States poss-
ess relatively so much Of vigor, that,
wheresoever an avenue is freely open
to all the world, they will penetrate
to the exclusion of those of the
Northern States? Is it the fact, that
the former enjoy compared with the
latter, such irresistibly superior vital
ity, independent of climate, soil, and
all other accidental circumstances, as
to be able to produce the supposed
result in spite of the assumed moral
and natural obstacles to its accom-
plishment, and of the more numerous
population of the Northern States?
The argument of those who adyo-
cate the enactment of new laws of
restriction; and condemn the repeal
of old ones, in effect AYERS that their
particular views of government have
no self-extending or self-sustaining
power Of their own, and will go no.
where unless forced by act Of Congress.
And if Congress do but pause for a
moment inthe policy ofstern coercion;
if it venture to try the expert
ment of leaving men to judge for
themselves what Institutions will best
suit them, if it be not strained up to
perpetual legislative exertion on this
point; if Congress proceed thus to
act in the very spirit of liberty, it is
at once charged with aiming to ex-
tend slave-labor into all the new Ter
ritories Of the United States.
OF course, these imputations on
the intentions Of Congress in this
respect, conceived as they we're in
prejudice, and disseminated in passion
are utterly destitute of any justifica
ton in the nature of things. and con
traTy to all the fundamental doctrines