The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-01-24
NO. 473.

| As man is more than his circumstances, a.
| freedom Is better than wealth. as rights ar,
| more important than institutions, it becomes vi
| to look well to the fundamental ideas which de
termine the character of Government and thu
course of its practical operation.
| 1.-The basis of American institutions is tn,
| Democratic principle of equality among men
They rest upon the solid foundation of popular
consent. The primary objects of their estab
hshment are the defeRce and protection OF per
sonal rights. IL they fail to secure these ends
1t Is the duty of the people who established, t.
amend or change them. To organize and ad
minister the Government upon these principles
is the true work Of a Republican people
! "While the Democratic idea thus constitutes
the basis of American institutions. various ex
ceptions, under the pressure of real or supposed
exigencies, have been admitted to its universe
application. Among these, Slavery, the crea
ture OF Despotism, and the deadly opposite o.
Democracy, claims baleful pre- eminence.
| hen our country asserted her inderend
ence, Slavery existed in all the States Its evi
influences, social and political, were, however
well understood and its irreconcilable antago
nism to the rights of human nature, and the
principles of just government, was universally
acknowledged"
The repeal of the Missouri Compromise is
treated with exquisite perspicuity, as follows:
| The founders of the Republic, in framing oul
institutions, were careful to give no nationa
sanction to this portentous anomaly; but they
attempted no interference with its existence il
the States. Outside of State limits, they allow
ed it no shelter. Within State limits, they lief
1t to the exclusive disposition of States imme
diately concerned. No fact is better establish
ed by the records OF the past than the preva
lence, during the earlier period of our history
OF an almost universal expectation that Slave
ry, excluded by positive prohibition from al
National territory, would gradually but certain
ly, and at no distant day, under the operation
OF the principles of the Declaration of Independ
ence, and through the action Of the State au
thortles, disappear wholly from every State o.
the Union. The foremost champions of Free
dom were citizens Of slave States, and occupied
the highest stations in the State and National
| Governments
In 1884, Immediately after the partial ad
Justment of the conflict between the claims O
the Union and the pretensions of the States il
respect to the territory between the Aleghaniel
and the Mississippi, through the cession, by
Virginia, of the territory northwest Of the Ohio
Jefferson proposed to provide forever against
the extension of Slavery, by a positive prohi
bition of its existence after 1900, in any terri
rory ceeed or to be ceded, or in any State to
be created out of such territory This proposed
prohibition received the votes of sixteen out of
twenty-three delegates, and of six out of nine
States IN the Congress of the Confederation. 1t
failed to become a law by reason of that pro-
vision of the Articles Of Confederation which
made the concurrence of Mt least seven States
necessary to an affirmative decision Of any
question. The great majority in its favor in
dicates, however, the prevalent sentiment of the
time.
"Three years later, the Ordinance Of 1887
impressed upon the soil of the territory north
west of the Ohio an indelible prohibition of
Slavery. That Ordinance was adopted by the
unanimous votes of all the States in Congress.
1t covered every inch of territory subject to the
EXCLUSIVE regulation of the General Govern.
was framed. Mr.. Madison declared it wrong
to admit in the Constitution the idea that there
could be property in man.. No such word as
slave or slavery found place in any of its pro-
visions. All recognition of the rightfuness of
slaveholding, and all national sanction of the
practice, was carefully excluded from the in
strument In every clause which has been or
can be construed as referring to Slavery, it is
regarded as the creature of State legislation,
and dependent wholly upon State legislation for
its existence and continuance.
"There is no trace in the Constitution itself,
or in the debates of its trainers, of any expect
alton or apprehension of the institution or main
tenance of Slavery by National law, or in Nation
al territory. No one anticipated its extension
beyond the limits of the existing States.
"But the people required additional security.
When, therefore, Virginia suggested an amend
ment of the Constitution, that "no freeman
ought to be deprived of his life, liberty, or
property, but by the idsc Of the EaId," Congress
refused to sanction this restricted guaranty,
but proposed for the adoption of the States an
amendment embracing a comprehensive and
express interdict against all invasion of person
al rights by the General Government. That
interdict made part of the Constitution by the
consent of the States, is in these words No
person shall be deprived of life.
liberty, or property, without due process of
law So long as this provision remains unal-
tered, it is not easy to see how Slavery can be
constitutionally introduced anywhere and con-
tinued anywhere by National legislation and
on National territory.
g This brief statement will suffice to show
what was the policy and what was the anticipa-
ton of the founders of this Republic in respect
to Slavery. Their policy was one of repres-
sion, Limitation, encouragement; they anticipa-
ted with confidence the suspicious result of
universal freedom. Persistent adherence to
their policy would doubtless have realized their
anticipations.
" need not say to you that this policy has
not been adhered to: nor need l trace the
gradual process by which the Constitution has
been wrested from its original purposes, and
the Government has been converted into an in
atrument for the maintenance and extension of
Slavery.
BY cessions from slave States, and by
treaties with foreign Governments, vast terri.
tories have been acquired, in all of which
the original policy of the Government required
prohibition, but to none of which was prohibi-
ton actually applied, until resistance to the
further increase of Slavery and the slave
power in the Republic, by the admission of
Missouri as slave State, led to the great con-
test between the Extensionists and the Restric-
tionists, which in 1920 terminated in the ad-
justment generally known as the Missouri Com
promise.
"The terms of that compromise were these
That Missouri should be admitted with Slavery;
that Slavery should be forever prohibited in
the territory acquired from France, north of
SO degrees 30 minutes, except Missouri; and
that Congress should refrain, for the present at
least, from Legislative prohibition of Slavery
south of SO degrees 80 minutes This last
term was only implied; it was not expressed.
"This compromise, in substance and effect,
was compact between the slaveholding and
non-slaveholding sections of the country, and
was universally so regarded. 1t yielded to
Slavery absolutely the territory occupied by
Missouri, and it left without the protection OF
prohibition all the residue of territory ACQUIRED
under the French treaty, south of &c degrees
30 minutes. AS the original policy of the
country, and the true principles of the Consti
tuition, required the exclusion of Slavery from
the whole of this territory, it was to be expect.
ed that this adjustment would be received with