Democrat and sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1853-1866, 1856-02-06

State" for the simple reason that she allows
domestic Negro slavery, this is against the
whole scope and spirit, and all the analogies
and equities of that august Instrument which
binds the Union, and gives g form and pres
sure to the nation.
Congress has no power whatever to inter
fere with slavery in the States. Slavery, IN
each State, is under its sole and exclusive con-
troll. Philanthropy may shed her tears over
the SORROWS of the slave-Eloquence and LIt-
erature may expoatulate with the master-but
slavery itself is entrenched and hidden behind
State sovereignty 1t is beyond the sphere
aud scope of national action and policy. This
Union, although most benign, fruitful, and
perpetual, is yet not a Ufrie4 to all intents
and purposes It is limited partnership.
II relates to common interests. common dan
gers, common institutions, and merely nation
IL matters 1t has no jurisdiction over and
cogrizarce Of what is mere local and pecu-
/ liar.
Now the General Government is prohibited
from touching the subjects of slavery in the
States, for obvious reasons. EUeTy one OF
those reasons apply actM equal force to an
choate near States" This prohibition, or
rather disability, is notable self illustration
and example of that habitual self-government,
and selfdevelopement, and centrifugal anti
centralizaticn, which amount to characters
tic instinct in the Anglo-Saxon race and
make the political religion of our individual
iziug Americans And if this idea OF unre-
strained local self-government is the philoso-
ply Id rationale of the relations between
the Union and the States, why not also of the
relations between the Union and inchoate
States?
Slavery in the States is essentially s.pe-
ic
can exist there, not by virtue of the law of
God, or of Nature, or of Nations, or of Com
mon Law, or of National Constitution. or Of
any law Of the Union, or of any other State,
but only by virtue of the local law of the
particular State. But slavery is just as pc
culiar to any Territory, or inchoate State that
permits it. God did not ordain there, nor
does the National Constitution carry it there /;
nor is it established there by any Natural,
International, Nation | or Common Law; in
legal and political contemplation, it is the
mere creature, and tenant at will of the local
law As Congress cannot interfere with sla-
very in State, because slavery is so peculiar
to that State, so, therefore, by a parity of
reasoning, Congress oaglst not to interfere
with this same pecuiiarity in a 60 new State"
BE slavery fair or foul, it is in fact best man
aged, and disposed of by those who bear its
responsibilities and its burdens, and who will
have to undergo its obscure future Any
foreign, central, external intermeddling
with it, from even the best motives, is always
delicate, impolite, dangerous, and exaspera-
ting. Is not this equally so with regard to
a new State? She may be small and few in
numbers, but her domestic institutions are
also in embryo, and just as subject to her
control as those of older and more indurated
States. She is just as keen-eyod to her own
interests, and just as jealous of any interfe-
renee.
The refusal to admit any new slave-holding
States draws an invidious distinction between
the sovereign and equal States of the Union.
1t implies or rather expresses national Judg-
ment of condemnation upon slavery, and
censure upon the States that tolerate it. 1t
pours contempt upon their opinions and insti-
tutions, segregates them amid their sisters,
and brands a shame upon their sunny brows
1t shapes and directs the policy and power Of
the nation, as such, in favor of the peculiar
tiles of some States, and against the peculiar
tiles of others, who are sovereign peers And
this, although these peculiarities arc allowed,
implied, and recognised in the compact that
constitutes the nation.
Now, the alleged badness of slavery does
not give the right to do all this. In the
present regard, bere is no question touching
the moral character of slavery, or the evil of
its extension. Our nation, for the purposes
of this argument, exists only in and by virtue
of its written Constitution individuals,
may, on their own responsibility, obey g high
er law" But our collective Nation, as such,
cannot recognize &C higher rule than its own
organic law, without ipso facto lapsing into
revolution or anarchy. As political entity,
boxa b;oLaY cO,oc;onoo +bop
devotion to its own Constitution.
Our nation, therefore, on no account, has
any right to sectionalze itself 1t has no
right to pry into the States, inspect their di-
verse social systems, and pronounce that some
should be copied and others avoided. Much
less, can it enter the lists, and use It's force
and policy to extend or restrict these systems;
especially such as are kRowa to the C0nstjtu-
tioR and were taken, at the first, into the arms
of the Union. In fact, to express the matter in
It's elements, stronger States, even if they do
forbid slavery themselves. have no right to lay
hold on national agencies and appliances, and
make them the means of conining and repress-
ing the social systems of the weaker ones
The Nation should never reduce itself to a
discordant assemblage of struggling States.
All this would be a sharp and astute perver-
sion Of the original partnership; IL would be
unfair to the States whose peculiarities were
assailed and restricted. That Government
which is the creature of all the States, forgets
Its place, when it frowns upon some of them, |
and says to them. 50 There shall be no more
of such as you p
The slaye-holding States, being by the con-
sent OF all parties, integral, equal and sover-
eIgn partners IN the Union, are fully entitled /
as Joint-oWners to all its fair and natural /
OH nd e.