Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1856-12-05

ate condemnation of the domestic institu
ton of the Southern States, as at length t.
pass invisibly to almost equally passonat,
hostility towards their fellow-citilens 0
those States, and thus finally to fall int
temporary fellowship with the avowed ant
active enemies of the Con ;tituton.
Ardently attached to liberty, in the alb
stract, they do not stop to consider practical
ly how the objects they would attain cal
be accomplished, nor TO reflect that even i
tho evil were as great as they deem it, they
have no remedy to apply, and thatit can on
ly be aggravated by their violence and un
constitutional action; a question which j.
one of the most difficult of all the problem;
( of social institutions. Political statesman
I ship, they treat with unreasoning intemper
ance of thought and language, Extremes
beget extremes.
Violent attack from the North finds its
inevitable consequence in the growth of a
spirit of angry defiance in the South. Thus
in the progress of events we had reached
that consu1nation which the voice of the
people has so pointedly rebuked of the at
tempt of portion of the States by sec
tional organization and movement to usurp
the control of the government Of the United
States.
1 confdentially believe that the great
body of those who inconsiderately took this
fatal step are sincerely attached to the Con
stitution and the Union. They would, up
on deliberation, shrink with unaffected hor-
ror from any conscious act of disunion or civ
iIwar; but they have entered into path
which leads nowhere unless to civil war and
disunion, and which has no. other possible
outlet. They have proceeded thus far in
that direction in consequence of the success
sive stages of their progress having consist
ed of series of secondary issues, each Of
which professed to be confined within con-
stitutional aud peaceful limits, but which at
tempted indirectly what few men are willing
to do directly-that is, to act aggressiyely
against the constitutional rights Of nearly
one half of the thirty-one States. ~
. In the long series of acts Of indirect ag-
gression, the first was the strenuous agita-
tion by the citizens of the Northern States
in Congress and out oft of the question of
negro emancipation in the Southern States.
The second step in this path of the evil acts
of the people Of the Northern States and
in several instances of their governments
aimed to facilitate the escape of persons
held to service in the Southern States and
10 prevent their extradition when reclaimed
according to law and virtue of express pro-
7isions Of the constitution. To promote
his object, Legislative enactments and 9TH
n means we're adopted to take away or de-
eat rights which the constitution solemnly
In order to nulify the then existing acts
# Congress concerning the extraditon of fu-
ritives from service, laws were enacted in
nanv States, forbidding their officers, un-
Ter the seyerest penalties, to participate in
he execution of any act of Congress what
yer. In this way that system of harmoni-
us cooperation between the authorities of
he United States and of the several States
Dr. the maintenance of their common insti-
tutions, which existed in the early years of
he Republic, was destroyed. Conflicts of
lrisdiction came to be frequent, and Con-
ress found itself compelled, for the support
the constitution, and the vindication of
S powers, to authorize the appointment of ;
ew officers, and the officers of the States
ere the Ministers of foreign governments,
State of mutual hostility, rather than t
,llow magistrates of a common country, t
eacefully subsisting under the protection c
one well constituted Union. Thus, here 9
$50 aggression was followed by reaction, I
nd the attacks upon the constitution at this 2
pint did but serve to raise new barriers for I
S defence and security. i
The third stage of this unhappy section f
controversy was in connection with the t
'ganization of territorial Governments and S
le admission of new States into the Union C
7hen it was proposed to admit the State c
Maine by separation of territory from Ii
lat of Massachusetts,, and the State of Mis- a
uFii formed a portion of the territory ceded r
2 France to the United States. Represen- c
tives in Congress objected to the admis RI
on of the latter unless with conditions b
tied to particular views of public policy.
le imposition of such condition was sue 81
ssfulTy resisted, but at The same period the b
estion was presented of imposing restrie- e,
ms upon the residueo of the territory eeded ii
France. That question was, for the time, Il
sposed of by the adoption of geographi- tt
line of limitation. In this connection it b,
ould not be forgotten that France, of her Il
m accord, resolved for consultations of the Of
ost ,fapsighted lsagacity, to cede Louisiana N
the United States, and that accession was Of
,epted by the United States. The latter ri
pressly engaged that inhabitants of ceded W
ritory should be incorporated in the Uni &C
of the United States and admitted as oil
IN as possible according to the principles I'll
the Federal Constitution, to the enjoy ii
mt of all the rights, advantages and i'm
mites of the citizens ofthe United States, Of
in the meantime they shall be main in
ned and protected in the free enjoyment Ii,
their liberty, property and the religion W
lieh they professed, Gel. .Es q
That is to say, while it remains in ter pI
orial condition its inhabitants are main fo
ned and protected in free enjoyment of lii
sir liberty and property, with a right then &C
pass into the condition of States on a te
ting of perfect equality with the original fir
ltes. The enactment which established st
/, restrictive geographical line was acqui- pc
ed in, rather than opposed by, the States Fl,
tho Union II stood ON the statute hook dc