Democrat and sentinel. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1853-1866, 1856-10-01

between the two races, so that the rules of so
ciety and the laws of the States even in thu
! communities of the -slaveholding region
are inezorably opposed to the negro. Why
! is it that Aboltionism does not begin at home
and reform these things?
But again, there is no power which can
prevent any State from passing whatever laws
it nsy please under the Federal Constitution,
for its own comfort and protection, and the
very same theory which induces US to respect
and to recognize the great doctrine of State
rights in the South, under which it holds its
osn slaves compels US also to recognize those
laws to which We have referred in the North.
in regard TO the free blacks The North reg
ul.ses its colored population as it pleases, and
is protected IN doing so by the Constitution
of the United States. All the negroes of the
North are represented In the ratio of federal
representation, and yet nearly all are disfran-
chised and alienated by the laws of the North
The South does as it pleases with It's colored
population, slave and free, and is protected
under the Federal Constitution, but its slaves
are only represente in the ratio of three ffths
in the federal representation.
In moral point of view, it seems at least
inconsistent that these abolitionists, who are
the free States. should be 20 extremely vitu-
peratiye when they come to treat of the con-
d.tion ct the negroes of the slave States Both
belong to the same inferior class, both are 50
regarded in all the States. The south found
legacy in slavery, transmitted to it by its
English ancestors, and the Constitution res.
pected the institution as it existed when that
instrument was framed. The North, while
it has rid itself of slavery, ESQ far as the name
is concerned, still retains the right to protect
itself against contact with a race which is
stamped as inferior by all classes of whites
wherever they are found.
The Northern States in the exercise of their
undoubted constitutional right consulted what
they deemed their own true interest. and one
after another, in their own time and their own
way abolished slavery. Against these pro-
ceedings in the North the South uttered not
a word CT complaint But the views and opin-
IONS of the Southern States were wholly averse
to abolition They believed it to be utterly
impossible, without the greatest danger, not
to their prosperity only but TO their very ex-
istcnce. > This was All opinion to which they
had as good right as the North had to the
opposite one. But they were not suffered to
enjoy and to act upon it in quletness and
peace. At tie very first Congress after the
government was organized, a petition from
the North YES presented, praying for the abb
olition Of slavery by Congress. Treacherous
attempts 10 deprive the South of her undoubt-
ed rights to manage her own affairs, have been
constantly made. The trainers of the Consti-
tuition declared in its preamble, that one of
their great objects in adopting it was q to in
sure domestic tranquility" But the = do
mcstic tranquility" of the South has been as
sailed by Northern Abolitionists, who knew
very well that they had no business whatever
in the matter.
A majority of the old States made the nc
groes free without opposition from abroad
That - vas ,5;ce for the North to do SO all
agreed that it was Just and proper in the
South to make no complaint is equally true
Now let US see whether the South has gained
any advantages. or committed any aggressions
with refe, ence to the new States
Maine and Ferment were admitted as free
States, and nobody asked them to put slave
ry into their constitutions. This was mat
ter of course, and SO treated all around.
But with reference to the Western States,
their exemption from slavery was not matter
of course. The South might have prevented
it if she had seen proper. The whole of the
territory north and west of the Ohio, and east
OF the Mississippi, belonged to tie State of
Virginia. She owned the land, and had the
uoser 10 control the settlement of every acre.
What did she do? She magnanimously gave
up not only her political jurisdiction, Tut also
her proprietary right to the Federal Govern
ment allowing the voters of the North TO Set
tie its destiny and all its proceeds to go into
the general Golfers Connecticut had spu-
rous claim to part of it-a claim precisely
like that which she set up to part OF Penn
sylyania ard which was decided against her
But her claim to the Western Reserve was
conceded to her-ske Kept it, sold 1t, and put
the proceeds into her own treasury. Virginia
did not protest e7en when the Ordinance OF
1877 was passed, abolishing slavery within
the Territory, which she had thus generously
given away Was there aay aggression IN all
this If there was encroachment' on either
side, who committed it? If there was unwise
concession, from whom did it come:
Tie Territory of Louisiana, including what
is now Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska,
Kansas, and the unoccupied wilderness beyond
was purchased from France IN 1913 Itwas
all slave Territory. We took 1t with french
law upon i; legalizing slavery. 1t could not
be made free without repeating that law
Missouri mad been settled long before by per-
sons who had owned slaves and who rad held
them there upon the faith of the law. They
we're not disturbed during her whole existence
as an organized territory. When she propo-
s.i TO come into the Union State, her peo-
nle. in the exercise of as plain right as any
people ever possessed, made a constitution for
themselves, in which, with almost entire una
ninity, they recognized the rights of the slave
holders TO retain the property acquired under
previous laws Then arose the widest yells