New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-02-08
FROM WASHINGTON.
SLAVERY AGITATION-BY WHOM
2 EDITORIAL Correspondence Of The N. Y Tribune.
WASHINGTON, Tuesday, Feb. 5, lS5f

correspondence
WASHINGTON, Tuesday, Feb. 5, 1856.
Mere words suffice to rule the great multitude
who do not think for themselves. To set them
against any movement or tendency, it is only re-
quisite that it should receive bad name. And,
as the trading, specializing and rent-receivlng
classes Of our cOuntrymen generally understand
that any serious difference among us growing out
of the existence of Human Slavery in our midst is
likely to depreciate their investments and diminish
their profits there is not an i'll phrase in their
vocabulary of more frequent or comprehensive APP
plcation than Slavery agitation" Whether it
be motion in Congress, sermon in church,
school-house harangue by some unknown itinerant,
a concert by the HutchinsOns, prayer-meeting for
the ensaved, or a movement to strengthen the
Emigrant Aid Society whatever can by any stretch
of language be termed " Slave Agitation that is,
against Slavery-excites their deadly aversion, and
is sure to encounter their most determined hos
tility.
| desire to take advantage of the mOmentOus
ul of the political tempest here TO call the atten-
ton of these classes to few facts, and to urge
such portion Of them as would not use words with
decetful purpose to consider whether some less
ambiguous phrase might not often more fairly ex-
press their meaning. When Mr.. Giddings was re-
qured few days since, to vote on Mr.. III. NJ.
Fullers resolve condemning all agitation respect
ing Slavery, he very properly asked whether agita-
ton in aror Of Slavery was included in the denim
citation. OF course, there was no answer. Let
me press that inquiry little further:
/. When the Kansas Nebraska act was passed,
it was the general understanding of its supporters,
at least throughout the Free States, that all ques
tOns relating to Sareryin any Territory ~ere thereby
r.terred for Conclusive arbitration to the People Of
that Territory. If they chose to admit Slavery, it
would come in if not, it would be shut out. They
might admit it at first and afterward expel it; or
they might at first exclude and afterward decide to
admit it, but the validity and c0nclusiyeness Of
their decision could in no case be questioned.
Such was the view of the Nebraska bill which COM
mended it to the favor of class at the North. But
the doctrine now asserted by the entire South, and
already acquiesced in by Pierce, Cushing BrOd-
head, II. VI. Fuller Clancy Jones and other
prominent Northern politicians is radically differ
ent from the foregoing 1t makes the Federal
Constitution extend the sectional or local law of
Slavery over the entire Territorial possessions of
the United States; so that any single STAKEHOLDER
may migrate with his negroes to Kansas or New
Mexico, and there work, whip, hunt and sell his
human cattle as if they horses, in spite Of the
hundreds or even thousands Of settlers who were
there before him, and who are unanimously hostile
to Slavery They all want it kept out; but he says
il shall come in, so it does in their teeth. Of
course. there can never more be Free Territory,
for any one STAKEHOLDER can prevent it, and some
one will always be found TO do so. True, when this
Territory comes TO be transformed into State then
the Northern doctors say il may exclude or abolish
Slavery, but 1oH iti The shareholders will have
become a powerful and patrOnizing class; the
slaves are Of course neither loved nor feared by
the mass of voters, who know that they ALLEVIATE
valuable customers, townsmen, neighbors, by
voting against Slavery. Who imsgines that
Slavery will nOp be abolished Whoever heard OF
its being so dealt with under such auspices And
how could the claim of the slovebolders for in-