The weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1852-1858, 1856-09-13

eau ZIG iuture tr@aiS u Itoutier Glty III
such crisis.
~ .3lh1* a,jE* a3ea
To this unexpected missive, our Cincinna-
tt friend has returned the appropriate reply
that we publish below M g.
CINCINNATI, Aug. 26, 1856.
-------, Esq, Baltimore. Nd.
My Dear Sir: I was much interested with
your political P. s., appended to your bust
ness letter of 10Th inst, which received
just previous to my leaving home on " the
frontier"
If American citizens have any "rghts,"
presume that conservative" men, at least,
will concede that all equally possess the
right to exercise their private judgments, at
any rate on debatable questions, in which all
have an equal interest,"
In soms respects you no d different politi-
cal sentiments from myself readily con-
cede to you the right to entertain and act in
correspondence with your own views, and |
claim the same right for myself
An election eminently implies the exercise
of this right, otherwise there could be no
election. do not therefore perceive why,
in the honest exercise of the same right, op-
posite parties should, of necessity, become
personal enemies, and indulge in the use of
|epithets or threats"
The question involved in the present can
vass for the Presidential election is not the
first on which tie North and the South
have teen divided. They have held mainly
different sentiments with respect to the ia
riff, Mexican war, internal Improvements,
the passage Of the Missouri Compromise, as
well as its final repeal and on the admis-
sion of Florida, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mis-
souri, and Texas as slave states.
In every instance the South has been sue
cessful, and Northern interests have been sa-
crificed. Yet the North, standing on the
original compact, has quietly submitted, and
stood faithful to the Constitution and the
Union. ~n
The g threats of +" secession made by
the South now, in the event of the election
of Col, Fremont, or the admission of Kansas
as free state seem to me as ungenerous as
they are preposterous.
Col. Fremont is certainly as constitution
ally eligible for the office of President as
g Their Messrs. Buchanan or Fillmore. He
has done as much, if not more, for the well
fare of the country as either, and believe
has greater intellectual capacity. l support
him however because he stands on a plat
form co amending itself to my conscience
as the only righteous one in the canvass. In
my judgment it does no wrong to the
South, while it fixes limit to the extern
sion of the great curse of the nation, and l
believe would meet with the unanimous
support of the original founders of the Re-
put lie, could they be permitted to act in the
present drama. &C.,. ~ =
What wrong is done to the South by the
admission of Kansas as free state /? The
fifteen Southern states have an area of ISL, :
448 square miles, with population in 1850
Including their 100000 slavesl Of
only 9,6l3,068; while the fifteen Northern
States, exclusive of California, $50 remote as
not seriously to affect, or BE affected by the
threats of secessionists,) has only an area of
456,6l7 square miles, witl'a population of
Ii, 342 ,285. In other words, with half the
area, the North las more than twice as ma
ny freemen as the South. Why ought not
the North to have pro-rata proportion Tin
the ratio Of the free population) of the ma
tional AREA with the South, (if they desire
it converted into Free States even were
there no questions of morals, or of political
economy involved? Did not the North con-
It toLt, more than its pro-rata proportion of
blood and treasure, in acquiring the national
domaine? ct s .r "
You say that you "claim an equal right
by the South with the North to all Terrific
ry and to carry to it such and all property as
is constitutionally recognized &c. / do not
know that shall dispute either your pre-
mise or your conclusion. As interpret the
Constitution do not think it necessary. In
your conclusion you only claim ''an equal
right by the fS6uth with the North" As
am rathersinclined to favor the idea of equal
rights, ! am compelled to say that SO far you
are fair. The Constitution does not recog-
Mise lavery,, except by implication, even in
the States, iand as Slavery cannot exist, las
we are told by the expounders of constitu-
tional law except BY the enactment of pos
tive legal statutes, cannot See how the
South can Claim to carry Slavery into any
Territory, until such Territory shall be Gre
ated into State, and the institution recog-
nized by the laws of such State.
The North do not want to take Slavery
into any Of the Territories themselves. and
they do not wish to limit the rights of the
South TO ady'greater extent than they wish
to limit their own.
! Chief, Justices Marshall and Story. as also
Chancellor Kent, have each given their ie-
gal opinions with reference to the powers of
Congress TO govern the Territories. They
agree that the, power u.s. absolute. II this
right is denied, the right Of Congress
may prescribe the terms Of Che admission of
States, and MAY there ore prohibit the, .ad-
mission Of Etah, with its peculiar institution
will also be denied tsoIa's =
Now as to secession. How are your. Sc
cessienists TO carry out their threats? It is
evident that they cannot secede, except by
the use Of force, or by d dissolution of bart,
nership through compromise, or by mutual
agreement If by force, % the pretexts al
legged, they will be guilty Of bad faith-a-
breach of compact. u by compromise, your
$4,000 masters will lose the protection of
the Northern arm for their peculiar family
institution. Besile les inthatevent the North
win at any rate get their share Of the com
mon estates. The broad prairies of the West
will in future be cultivated by freemen. -.iii
The use Of force however is something the
North has not hpprehended, threatened or