The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1856-01-23


mentSend cultivation, the country was
astounded BY the demand Of the Slave
Power for the abrogstion of the Nilsson
ri prohibition. At first the demand
was heard with incredulous amazement,
and then with unavailing indignation.
It aVailed nothing to appeal to plighted
faith nothing to appeal TO ancient pol
10y or Constitutional guarantees. The
great dominant power of Slavery demand
ed the sacrifice of Freedom.and the obla.
ton must be made. The Missouri Pro-
hibition was repealed; the Compromise
Of 1920, performed to the letter, and far
beyond the letter, by the Free States,
was broken up aud destroyed by the
Slave States, to avoid the ful6llment of
its only stipulation in favor of Freedom.
The pretences under which this wrong
waf perpetrated, give additional keen
ness to the sense of injury.
It was boldly asserted that the prohi-
bition was Unconstitutional. The pow
er to prohibit territorial slavery had
been exercised by the first Congress un.
der the Constitution in the act provi-
ding for continuing in full effect the or
dinance of 1887. The Constitution, in
express terms, had conferred on Con-
gress the power TO make all ncedful
rules and regulations concerning the
territory of the United States. This
provision had been uniformly regarded
IS authorizing all necessary territorial
legislation. Almost every Congress had
exercised the power, and almost every
President had approved its exercise
The very persons who denied the power
to prohibit slavery, asserted the power
to establish territorial governments and
to define their departments and powers,
nd therefore, in denying the power OF
prohibition, were reduced to the mecca
atty of denying that the greater includes
the less.
Under these circumstances, after she
prohibition had remained unquestioned
for more than the third of a century,
the denial of its constitutionality rather
provoked indignation than excited doubt
It Has,also, insisted that the doctrine
of popular sovereignty required the
repeal of the prohibition. This was a
mere abuse of terms. The true idea OF
popular sovereignty demands as a pri.
mary essential condition the recognition
of inalienable personal rights. There
can be no genuine popular sovereignty
where a portion of the population is en-
shaved. In the sense of the apologists
for repeal popular sovereignty signifies
nothing but the right of a portion of
the community to e~nslave the rest. 1t
begins by the denial of the natural
rights of man. It must end in the to-
tai subEersion of the fundamental prin-
eiples of American institutions. For q
free and independent people, it would
substitute q community of masters, de.
pendents and slaves.
Such is the repulsiyc theory. In
practical operation it has not proved
more attractive. As embodied in the
Nebraska anEas bill, it has been fruit
full of nothing but evil. It has not con-
ferred q single substantial benefit upon
the settlers of either territory. In no
respect are they distinguished from the
settlers of Minnesota, where slavery is
prohibited, except by exposure to its
evils, The sole special effect of the
Nebraska-K anzas act upon the terrific
ries organized under it is to open them
to the Introduction of slaves. In one o
them it has led to desperate attempts to
affect that object-to invasion, usurpa.
ton, violence, bloodshed-almost to
civil war. Grimes like these are mol
the legitimate fruits of that doctrine o.
popular elfgoyernment, to the main.
tenaDce of which our fathers pledged
their lives, their fortunes aud their sa
cred hono.a
In all these things our W State ha:
deep and peculiar interest. Our owr
history furnishes the most complete vim
dioation of the policy of slavery prohi
bition. We occupy, in part, the sol
protected from the blight of slavery b.
the -ordinanees of 1887. For mor4
than half acentury the people of Obi
have been accustomed to regard tho Or
dinanee with mingled emotions of graf
ituds and pride. Conspicuous among
its provisions and fit companionshiI
with its sacred guarantees of religious
freedom, of iberality towards emigrants
of inviolability of private contracts, o
the security Of private property, anc
universal education, stands the great in
terdiet against slavery, acknowledging
an impartiality protecting the tights o
man as man.
The words to which NO always reeu,
when seeking in the Ordinance the pecu
liar springs Of our wonderful ~prospcrit,
and progress, are those which embed,
this prohibition. Never did the nobl
pioneers who laid the foundations, o.
which Nenow joyfully build, complain
of that interdiet as an infringement Q
any rights, personal or political. O.
the contrary they have aver spoken G
it as a pillar of fire by night and of