The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1856-03-28
THE AGaREssIoNs AND UsURPA.
TI0NS OF THE SLAVE POWER.
Deeiaratisn OF Principles and Purpsses
Of the Repabiiean Party.
Address Of the Republican Convention
at Pittsburg, Feb. 22d, 1855.
Concluded.
TIE PLEAS URGED IN DKTKScE or rHKsE AccRkS-
sIoxs OF SLAVERY.

THE PLEAS uRGEp IN OFFENCE or rHEsE ACcRKs-
sIoSs OF SLAVERY.
As matter Of course, for all these acts,
and for all the outages by which they have
been attended,, the sliyeholding interest pre-
tends % find warrant in the Constitution
of the United States. All usurpation, in
countries protesting to bo free, must have
color Of law for its support. No outrage,
committed by Power upon Popular Rights,
Is left without some attempt at yindication.
The partition Of Poland, the overthrow oil
the Constitution of Hungary, the destrue..
ton Of Irish Independence, like the repeal
OF the Missouri Compromise and the con-
quest of Kansas, were contaminated with
scrupulous observance OF the forms OF law.
Tx PLEA THAT TIE MISSOURI COMPROMISE WAS
NOT COMPACT.
I. The repeal of the Missouri Compromise,
1t is urged on behalf Of those by whom II
was effected, involved no violation OF good
faith, because that Compromise was merely
IN act of Congress, and rs such rcpeaiable
at pleasure. Regarded as legal technical
ity, We are not disposed TO contest this plea.
The Compromise was undoubtedly embodied
in a Congressional enactment, subject to re
peal. Bat in this case, by the very nature
OF the transaction, the faith OF the parties
was pledged that this enactment should not
Be repealed. The spirit Of the law, what
ever its form, was the spirit of compact.
Its enactment was secured by an exchange
OF equivalents. The slaveholding interest
procured the admission of Missouri into the
Union, by conSenting and voting, through
It's Representatives in Congress, that north
of It's southern line. in the Territory OF
Louisiana, Slavery should be prohibited for
trer. Without that consent and that vote,
the admission OF Missouri could not have
been secured: nor would the prohibition OF
Slavery until 1851, or until any other date,
or for any other time than that specified in
the act-namcly, J0rerer-haye purchased
the assent Of the free States to the admls-
sion of Missouri rs slave State into the
Union. The word Jorerer, therefore, was n
part of the law, and Of the consideration for
H. enactment. Such law may berepealed,
but it, repeal is the rupture OF n compact
the rcpudiatiOn Of a solemn covenant. The
Missouri Compromise has been regarded rs
such a compact, from the date of its enact
mcnt, in all sections and by all the people
of the country. Successive Presidents have
invoked Cor il respect and an obligation
scarcely inferior 10 that OF the Constitution
itself: and Senator Douglass himself, as late
as 1916, declared that it had been canon
lied in the hearts Of the American people,
~ a sacred thing, which no ruthless hand
would ever be reckless enough to disturb. y
Whatever, therefore, the mere form oil the
bond may have permitted, good iaith on the
mart of the representatives Of the slavchold-
Ing interest required that it should be kept
inyiolate.
II. Nor is this charge ofbad faith, brought
against the slaycholding interest, for having
repealed the Missouri Compromise, answer
cd or cyadcd by the pleas argued in its dc
fence, that originally it was ioreibly imPos'
cd by the free States upon the slave States,
without their consent; that il was sui
quently violated by the free States, in their
refusal to extend its provisions over New
Mexico and Utah; or that its repeal, having
been offered by the free States themselves,
could not be resisted or refused by the rep
resentatiyes Of Slavery. ~ Even If 1t
were true that the prohibition Of Slavery
north of SO deg. 80 min. was originally en-
acted by the free States, against the votes
of the South, the fact that the admission oil
Missouri was accepted rs the price Of that
prohibition would have made the slayehOld-
ins interest party to the transaction, as
sentinS to it, terms, and bound by its obi
CATIONS. Bat the fact Is not 80. The act
of March &, lS2O, which admitted Missouri,
and prohibited slavery in the Louisiana Ter
ritOry north of SO deg. 80 min., received In
the Senate the votes OF fourteen members
from sLvcholling States, while only cigh
were cast against il and in the House OF
Representatives, hiriy-eigh members from
the slave States voted for il, and hiriy-seren
against il. 4 majority of the votes from
slayeholdins States, in each branch OF Con-
grcss, were thus given for the bill; and 30
far were tho representatives of slavery from
regarding il rs having been forced upon
them, that Charles Pinckney, one of their
greatest and ablcst leaders, declared, on the
night of its passage, that" 10 lrGs regarded
m The SldrehOldiAg SAFES as a triumph. -
(2.) Still more absurd is II 10 say that the
refusal Of the North to extend the provisions
of the Compromise over other regions, was a
violation Of its terms, or in any way released
the parties TO il from their obligation to
abide by its requirements. (3.) IL is true
that the ostcnsible author Of the proposition
10 repeal il was n Senator from FREE State /;
but that fact docs not authorize the infer
ence that the sentiment Of the free States
was Justly and truly represented by his
action. There was, indeed, no room Ia
l.,,kt ,t,.t "a ,,-,s l,un,o1 ky a., ,,,opt
nous voice of the free States, and that il
would be regarded by them, and by the
country at large, rs avery gross and wantOn
violation of obligations which had been vol
UNFAIRLY assumed. No matter from what
geographical quarter il came, twas brought
forward in the interest and ON behalf Of the
Shareholders. This, indeed, il among the
worst Of the effects Of slavery, and among
the most signal proofs of it, ascendency
that able and ambitious men should enlis'
in its service, and volunteer to perform OIL
ces on its behalf which its representative
would scorn To perform themselycs-frou
the conviction that by that path the honor
and disnitics Of the General Government ar,
10 be- secured. The slaveholding Interest
owed il to honor and good faith % resist Oh,
temptations which such men might hold Cut
for the repudiation OF its obligations.
TIE FLA THAT COMPRESS has No rowER II
PROHIBIT SLAVERY IN the TERRITORIES.
III. But IL is urged that the original en-
actment Of the Missouri Compromise, by
which slavery was prohibited from entering
portion OF the territory Of the UniteC
States. was a violation of the Constitution
that Congress has no rightlul power I,
make such prohibition but that into an,
territory over which the Constitution Is cS
tended, the Shareholders has right, by viz
tue Of its provisions, to take his slaves.
In reply to this, We answer;
FIrst-That, whether the plea b. true o.
false, IL comes too late; that the slayehOld
ing interest conceded the constitutiOnalit,
Of the prohibition. by asserting TO its enact
ment, and aiding it by the votes Of its repre-
sentatives.
Srcoad-That, IL the plea were true, tn
cnactmep. was null and void. by rason o
it, unconsiitutionality. and its repeal, there
fore, was n needless ostcntatiOn Of bad faith