The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-10-16


Native adults who cannot read and o
write lo2 2,2lO
College
Pupils 20
fSpils and schools as, sa4ss a,1is
Public Libraries p
Votes poed at the last election 2l,7oe $500
Georgia has free white population of 52l ,572,
and eight Representatives,, or one for 90, $50
white inhabitants. Maine has a free white pop
ulation of 58l 1913, 100000 more than Georgia.
and six Representatives, or one for 96,969 in
habitants. Virginia has white population of
894,SOO, and thirteen Representatives, or one for
6S, $50 free white inhabitants. Massachusetts,
has white population of 9S5 ,45o, (about 100000
more than Virginia. and eleven Representatives,
or one for s9,5S6.
But some one will say: "The South pays di-
rect taxes in the same proportion, as an offset for
this property representation" This is true Let
us examine this point and see whether the South
has been the gamer or loser by this provision.
direct tax has been resorted to only four
times since 1889, by the General Government
viz in 1898, 1913, 1914, and 1916, and is not
likely to be resorted to again. The whole amount
assessed was fourteen millions of dollars or this
the South paid for her slaves only Sl,256,553.
| In 1887, the surplus revenue of the Union,
| amounting to over S37 100000, was distrib-
| uted among the several States in proportion
| to their electoral votes By the census of 1880
the North had zoos, 45l free persons, and the
| South had 1929 289. The free States received
S2l ,4lO,7 77.12 the slave States Sl605S, 082.S5
| Every free man Of the North received but $3.50
while every free man of the South received S4.20
| in that division.
At that time, the South had 1875 electoral
votes of which 25 were on account of slaves
She therefore received by that arrangement
S3ls6, 1880, on account of the representation OF
her slave property From that, If we deduct the
81 ,256, 553 paid by her direct tax on account
of her slaves, there is left 81 929, 57450 as the
bonus which the South has received from the
Treasury of the nation, on account of the repre-
| sentation of slaves-Southern property repre-
scented in Congress.
| Such has been the practical operation of this
provision of the Constitution In view of it, Mr.
Pickering once said in Congress: "The terms
| were not bad for the South to take" So we
should think.
By it the South has had an extra representa-
ton in Congress of from ten to twenty members
and corresponding extra voice in all the affairs
| of Government. In addition to this, she has re-
ceived nearly 100000 out of the National
Treasury, in consequence Oft his unequal repre-
sentation-this representation of Southern prop
| erty.
| But, sir, this is in the Constitution, and we
abide by it. / have alluded to this subject, not
| for the purpose of making war upon the Consti-
| tuition, but for the purpose of giving practical
reason why we are opposed to the extension OF
Slavery. We are opposed to the extension OF the
| principle of property representation, and espe-
cially to a privileged class. Daniel Webster
| once said:
81 have made up my mind, for one that under cir
cumsances will consent to the extension of the area OF
Slavery in the United States to further
slave representation in the House of Representatives."
So / say, and SO say the people of the free
States.
have gone into somewhat tedious detail OF
figures, to show that the North is the sufferer
that the people of the free States have reason to
| complain of inequality, and not the South. The
South have more than their equal rights. Two
thousand millions of dollars of Southern prop
erty--so called by Mem--is represented on this
floor. Ithas twenty Representatives here; while
not a cent of Northern property is represented.
No man is here to represent our horses and cat
tie, our iron, our ships, or our mills and thank
God it is so. Free and independent men-free,
intelligent, and liberal thought-and the interests
of free, educated, and well-paid labor-have their
Representatives here from the North. Property
| representation is confined to the South.
And yet, sir, we hear Southern men talking
about State Equality" as though the South did
not enjoy equal rights with the North. We are
told that Slavery must be extended, in order
to secure and preserve to the South her equal
rights.
This argument is often presented in different
| shape. We have been told many times this sea-
sion, that the Territories are common property,
and that the Southern man has the same right to
| occupy them that the Northern man has. All this
we admit We admit that they are common prop
erty, purchased by the common treasure; and
that men from all sections have an equal right
| in them. But we deny that the prohibition of
Slavery in the Territories impairs any mans
right. Gentlemen talk as though they could not
| move into a new Territory without their slaves.
They say that, unless they can take their slave
property there and hold and use it as they do in
| the States, they are excluded. Not so, sir. As
well might the banker say he was excluded be-
cause he could not take his bank with him into
the Territory. His bank charter is the creature
of local law. Slave property is the creature of
the same law ; and neither are property beyond
the locality governed by said laws.
Bat, sir, how stands the account between the
North and South, in relation to the Territories
acquired, and paid for out of the common Treas
ury, since the adoption of the Constitution
Since that time, territory has been purchased
or acquired, out of which fire slave States have
been formed, and only tpo free States. The free
States have paid more than two-thirds the cost
of the acquisitions, and obtained less than one
third of the States This is what | suppope
Southern gentlemen call estate Equality" These
States have the following extent of territory and
representation in Congress: