Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1856-01-26
Por the Busle.
THD PRESIDENTS MESSAGE.

FRIEND MARiCs 1T should lie remembered
that it is universally admitted, and conceded, both
by Wings, Democ ats, and Free Sellers, That the
Constitution of our country recognizes the legal
constitutional right Of slaveholding. Tho mes
sage Of the President, as fat MS | have observed,
receives from the press universal cond emnation.
But the so much mathematical message is o de.
fence of the fame promises. A yindication of the
same doctrine; and | can not see how any one,
holding the views generally adhered to by the
mass Of even Republicans, can but own, on exam
~ination, that his deductions are Constitutionally
fair and legitimate. Himself holding, as do free
soil Republicans, with the great mass of the peo-|
pie. that the Art. in tho Constitution, which pro-
vides for the return of '~..fugiires from serrice, or
labor relates to slaves; how can we with these
admissions, object to the cxpediency, or the right,
urged by the Pre- ident, to amend that clause of
the statute which relates to f%ugitivcs so as to place
this important particular under tho regulations of
the General Government. "Thus, relieving it from
the obstacles raised up by the Legislation Of some
OF the States" But this amounts to q fugitive
slave-law-making. And its character and features
are left to the predominant influence of the two
sections of the Union. Under the Major Southern
influence, the late fugitive bill was enacted.
The character of future regulations in this mat
ter, must be decided in like manner, by tho con-
tending, sectional interests of the people, compos-
ing the different sections of the Union. Then, l
repeat, it seems diff cut to show why, ii the Con-
stitutiou provides for the return Of fugitive slaves
why the General Government, not the State Gov
crnments should not regulate this matter.
And on the hypothesis of Government, the mi
nority should rendera willing obedience. 2. Where
the President contends that the Wilmot proviso is
subject to repeal as any other enactment of doubt
full Constitutional authority, who can object upon
political p~remises2 None. IF done, it must be
done upon the ground that the Nation has no NOR
al. Constitutional. or legal right to devote any por-
ton of her soil to slavery. That we have no right
neither legal, nor moral, to permit slavery to exist
any where, within the control of the Government.
We are, says an eminent writer, one people, one
nation; and we have no right, Constitutional or
moral to permit the enslavement of any part of
the nation. But take in connection with this, the
position taken in the Message, namely, chat new
Terrific, les should be admitted, and organized with
out restrictions on this disputed point; and left to
judge for themselves, whether they do, or do not,
admit of slavery.
/ repeat, rs much rs we may loathe the doctrine,
that slavery may or may not be introduced any
where, at the will of the people, still if. as Repub-
lieans VIC own its constitutionality; it does appear
difficult to show, why it should not upon Constitu-
tional grounds, be left to the voice of the people
settling these Territories. And this should teach
the necessity of raising our banner higher; which
can only be done by repudiating the Constitution,
or by a more thorough examination become ena-
bled to adopt the Goodell or Smithsonian stand
point; the only consistent position, as well as the
only available political position, against either the
existence. or spread of slavery.
Let US see. If one portion of the Union may
hold slaves Constisutionally, which is admitted,
why may not another. Or, why may not Kansas
pc admitted as the Message would roquire,on equal
footing with the original States; with or without
slavery.
~ If admitted at all, must not, should not, now
States be admitted upon equal footing with the
rest2 If the Constitution does not provide for
two classes of States, one with Constitutions pro-
visions to hold slaves, and the other without any
such Constitutions provisions. it would indeed ap-
pear SO when the admission is granted that the
Constitution recognizes the legal right of slave
holding any where.
rto But again: those who hold that slavery is I'M
constitutional every where, are the only persons
who dare hold that even Congress can have power
TO prevent any free State, old or new, when once an
The Union from changing its Constitution 80 as to
introd uce slavery whenever it choose to do so.-
Very plainly it would be folly to attemptit. Very
plainly would it be difficult for them to maintain
such n position. Why, because it would be affirm
ing that Congress can suppress slavery in some Of
II C.y- IL. -. l. - - al as, II JIo,, I
Then if this be SO, and none will dispute it, the
Republican idea of limitation Of slarery, amounts
to only this, in its stcrnest and most favorable pro-
portions. Namely: if it were possible which it is
not, to keep slavery out of the Territories; thus
compelling them to come in, as free States; even
this would be with the understanding that they
can, yes, that they may by change of Constitution
become slave States at any moment thereafter
Then the utmost of the limitation doctrine is, we
may admit of slavery, "local slavery all over the
Union, when National liberty would be allowed
the balance. Look at it. What n farce for this in
rtelligent, Reformatory, and progressive age. Is
this, even this, the only hope of tho 100000
slaves Of this country? Is the nation to discharge
its duties, and secure national freedom by a pro-
cess like this?
This is but q sketch of one Of the absurdities of
the limitation theory. Why the call on the Gener-
al Government for Wilmot Provisoes against the
spread of slavery, is answered by Federal Legisla-
ton against freedom where it has long existed
And State Legislation may enact slavery through
out the entire North tomorrow, upon the present
ground Of contest.
The truce between slavery and liberty must be
based upon the matter of fact policy of, first, the
injustice and consequently the Illegally Of slavery
every where under the canopy of the Government.
For that which will enslave a fellow man is not,
nor can not be called law. We have no right to
permit the enslavement of one of the nations sub
iects for il we do we thereby endanger our own