The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-08-14

round numbers, of the nineteen millions of
free persons in the United States, by the census
| OF 1850, thirteen millions. or more than two
thirds, resided in the free States, and this dis.
proportion is constantly and rapidly increasing.
| Allowing for the slaves Of the South, according
to the rule of the Federal Constitution, and the
preponderance of the free States is still in the
proportion OF IA to 30, or moro than three
| hfths. The slave States do not constitute one.
half of the nation, either in numbers, wealth, or
any legitimate element of political power.
But is 1t true, in point of fact, on any fair
view of things, that the Philadelphia Conven-
ton did select both its candidates from the
Northf Colonel Fremont was born in Geor.
gla, was reared and educated in South Caro-
lima, and had married the daughter of Mis-
souri, STAKEHOLDER. He is Southern in origin,
training, and association. When, and how,
and where, did be become Northern man ?
Certainly, not by his residence in California
That State is on neither side of Mason and
Dixons line, for the simple reason that that line
was never run so far west Our Pacific Terri.
tories constitute a distinct political system Of
their own. They are totally disconnected, and
must ever remain so, from the sectional division
OF the Atlantic States. That division appeals
neither to their interests nor their passions
Distance OF space has the same effect in pro-
ducing impartiality as distance of time. II
has been said that the contemporaneous iudg-
ment of the United States upon European
events, Is as much to be relied upon as the iudg-
ment of posterity. Our Pacific coast is near.
ly three times as distant, in time of comr,uni-
cation, as are France and England. The States
which will arise on the Pacific may hereafter
become the umpires of the Republic. They
belong neither to the North nor the South. In
any sense which can connect them with our
a,tb g. y.
They have independent objects of their OVID,
and will always pursue their own peculiar sys.
TENS of politics
1t Is true that California is free State,
but its political associations have been steadily
with the slave States. With the execution of
the brief term of Colonel Fremont in the Uni.
ted States Senate, California has sent no man
to either House of Congress, who has not gone
with those who went farthest in the support Of
Slavery. At this moment, that State is conf
IDENTIFY relied upon to vote for Mr. Buchanan,
the Southern candidate for the Presidency.
California, although not itself afflicted with Sla-
very, has been, in short, Pro-Slavery. At any
rate, 1t has not been Anti-Slavery. It is not
an "AboIuiOnized" State, as Southern gentle.
men would say that Massachusetts, is. Resi-
dence in California affords no proof, and raises
no presumption even, of hostility to the pecu-
liar institutions Of the South.
In truth, the real point Of the objection 10
the Republican nominations, which Mr.. Fill.
more has embodied in his Albany address. Is
not to the residence of tue candidates. but 10
the issues raised, and TO the sectional location
OF the strength relied upon to elect those candi-
dates. If the Republican party had nomina-
ted Francis +. Blair, OF Maryland, for the Presi-
dency, and Cassius NJ. Clay, of Kentucky, for
the Vice Presidency, the opposition of the South
Nynn hnu Loot e.
apprehensions of a dissolution of the Union
entertained by Mr.. Fillmore would not have
been one whit less gloomy. Indeed, it is quite
probable that as the Pierces, the Shannons. the
Douglases, and the Buchanans, are more de-
tested IN the free States than any Southern men
Blairs and the Clays would be more obnoxious
than even the Wades and Wilson's of the North
No! The real objection is not to the local
residence of the Republican candidates. The
objection to Colonel Fremont is not that he
was born in Georgia, educated in South Caro-
lima, married into the family of Missouri slave
holder, and now has his residence and inter
ests in a State on the Pacific, which is in no
way involved in the sectional disputes of the
Atlantic States the objection is, that he is
the candidate Of the seventeen free States,
against Mr.. Buchanan, the candidate of the
fourteen slave States. The objection is, that
the party which supports Colonel Fremont is,
in reference 10 the location Of its strength,
bounded by a geographical line; and that its
success would be the triumph Of one section
over another.
In this division of the States, Delaware is
reckoned as a free State. 1t ought to be so
reckoned, in reference to the issues involved in
the present contest. Delaware has little lin
gering remnant of Slavery, but has long pro-
hiblted the expectation of slaves. Delaware
has no interest in save-breeding or Slavery ex-
tension, but is opposed to both. During the pen
dency of the Wilmot Proviso controversy, the
Legislature Of Delaware instructed their Sena-
tors in Congress to obtain, if possible, the pro.
hibition of Slavery in the territories of the
United States. The interests, opinions, and SEN
tlments, of Delaware, are all hostile to the ex-
tension of Slavery. The Republican party ex-
lists there in full vigor, and if Col. Fremont
loses the vote of the State, it will only be in con-
sequence of the disturbing element Of Ameri-
canism.
do not affect to deny that the spectacle of
the seventeen free States arrayed against the
fourteen slave States, which is substantially the
aspect of the pending Presidential contest, is
one to be contemplated with profound concern.
owe it to the candor with which | desire to
discuss all political questions, and to the intel
igence of those to whom this paper is address
ed, to admit that the existing condition of things
Is most undesirable and most deplorable. Is it
remediable 2-snd if so, by whom? Are the free
States responsible for this condition Of things,
Or can they, consistently with their principles and
do anything which will put an end
to it?
A difference of opinion, broad, deep, and ir-
in reference to the institution OF
Slavery, exists in the country. 1t is not an
old difference of opinion, but a modern differ
ence of opinion. 1t has arisen quite within
The recollection of men in middle lite The free
States, still holding fast to the views of all the
fathers of the Republic, North and South, re-
gard Slavery as morally wrong, politically dan
yerous, and, in an economical point of view,
wasteful, exhausting, and ruinous. With such
opinions, long cherished and clearly immova-
Bile, the free States cannot consent to the ex-
tension of Slavery over the Territories of the
Union. On the other hand, the slave States
have, of late, adopted the opinion that the in
stitution of Slavery is both abstractly right and
advantageous. They believe, or
Affect to believe, that its extension is for the
general good, and, at any rate, essential to their
own interest. Here is case of irreconcilable
Inference of opinion between the two sections
Of the country. Regret it as much as we may,
here it is; and what is to be done about it? Is
here really any other solution of it, than that
which Is the solution of all other questions under
republican forms of government-the submis-
SION of the minority TO the fairly-expressedJv will
Of the majority? Is any other solution of it pos
,ible, or would any other solution of it be sub.
nitted to? Is it seriously proposed, that seven.
cen States shall yield to fourteen States: that
thirteen millions of people shall yield to six
millions?
Clearly, the minority must submit The only
to it wiz: COMPROMISED is now Inn