Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1858-03-18

less intense in the Northern than in some
o the Southern States. All of the former
contemplated an early emancipation. The
fathers seem not to have anticipated an en- i.
largement of the National Territory; con-
seduently, they expected that all the new
States to be hereafter admitted would be
organized upon subdivisions Of the then ex-
isting States. or upon divisions of the then
existing national domain. That domain
lay behind the thirteen States, and stretch
ed from she Lakes to the Gull. and was
bounded westward by the Mississippi. 1t
was naturally divided by the Ohio River,
and the Northwest Territory and the South
west TERRITORY were organizad on that d.
| vision. IL was foressen. even then, that
the new States to be admitted would ul:i-
mately overbalance the thirteen original
ones. They were, however, mainly to be
yet planted and matured in the desert, with
the agency Of human labor.
The fathers knew only Of two kinds Of
| labor the same which now exist among
ourseIves-namely, the labor of African
Slaves and the labor OF freemen. The for
mer then 2redominated in this country, as
it did throughout the continent. A con-
fessed deficiency of Slave Labor could be
supplied only by a continuance of the then
existing Importation from Africa The sup
ply of Free Labor depended on domestic
increase, and voluntary immigration from
Europe. Settlements, which had thus
early taken on Free Labor character or a
Slave Lator character were already matur-
ing in those parts of old States which were
to be ultimately detached and formed into
new States. When new States cf this
class were organized, they were admitted
promptly, either as Free States or as Slave
States. without objection. Thus Vermont,
| Free State, was admitted in 1871; Ken
lucky, Slave State, in 1892; and Tennes-
see, also Slave State. in 1876. Five new
States were contemplated to be erected in
the Northwest Territory. Practically it
was unoccupied, and therefore open to labor
OF either kind. The one kind or the other,
in the absence of any anticipated emula-
ton, would predomnate, just as Congress
should intervene 10 favor it. Congress
interviewed in favor of Free Labor. This,
!
Indeed, was an act of the Continental Con-
gress, but it was confirmed oy the first Con-
stitutional Congress. The fathers stimuli
taneously adopted three other measures Of
less direct Intervention. First, they initi-
ated in 1889, and completed in 1908, the
absolute suppression of the African Slave
Trade. Secondly, they organized systems
e g. I'd oh
stimulated voluntary immigration from Eu-
rope. Thirdly, they established an easy,
simple and uniform process Of naturaiza-
ton. The change OF the balance of power
from the Slave Stat to the Free States,
which we are now witnessing, is due chiefly
to those four curly measures of national
intervention in favor OF Free Labor. II
would have taken place much sooner If the
borders OF the Republic had remained un-
changed The purchase of Louisiana and
the acquisition of FIorid4, however. were
transactions resulting from high political
necessities, in disregard Of the question
between Free Labor and Slave Labor. In
admitting the new State of Louisiana,
which was organized on the Slave Labor
settlement of New Orleans, Congress prac-
ticed The same neutrality which it had be-
fore exercised in the States of Kentucky
and Tennessee. No serious dispute arose
until 1919, when Missouri, organized with
in the former province of Louisiana upon
Slave Labor settlement in St. Louis, ap-
piled for admiss'oR as a Slave State, ana
Arkansas was maDifestly preparing to ap-
pear soon in the same character. The bal
ance of power between the Slave States
and the Free States was already reduced
to an equilibrium, and the eleven Free
States had an equal represent ton with
the eleven Slave States in the Senate of
the United States The Slave States unan-
imously insisted on an unqualified admis-
sion of Missouri. The Free States, with
less unanimity, demanded that the new
| State should renounce Slavery. The CON-
| troversy seemed to shake the Union to its
foundations, and it was terminated by q
| compromise. Missouri was admitted as a
Slave State. Arkansas, rather by implica-
ton than BY express agreement, was to be
admitted, and it afterward was admitted as
| Slave State On the other hand, Slavery
was forever prohibited in all that par, of
the old province of Louisiana yet remain
ing unoccupied, which lay North of the
parallel of Sc deg. 80 min. North latitude
The reservation for Free Labor included
the immense region now known as the Ter
ritories of Kansas and Nebraska. and SEEM
ed amp'e for eight, ten, or more Free
States. The severity of the struggle and
the conditions Of the compromise indicated
!, very plainly, however, that the vigur Of ma
tional intervention in favor OF Free Labor
and Free States was exhausted. Still, the
existing statutes were adequate to secure
! an ultimate ascendancy Of the Free States
The policy of intervention in favor oil
Slave Labor and Slave States began with
the further removal Of the borders of the Re.
public. | cheerfully admit that this policy
has not been persistent or exclusive, and
claim only that it has been, and yet is, pre-.
domInan. am not now to deplore the an.
> nexation of Texas. | remark simply tha,
it was bold measure, of doubtful constitu
D tionality, distinctly adopted as an act o
v intervention in favor of Slave Labor, and
D made or intended to be made most effective
u by the stipulation that the new State o
e Texas may hereafter be divided ard so re-
r organized as to constitute five Slave States
a This great act cast long shadow before il
: "a shadow which perplexed the people o
e the Free States. 1t was then that feebl,
+ social movement, which aimed by mora
J. persuasion at the manumissioE of slaves
d gave place to political organizations, whicl
e have ever since gone on increasing in en-.
5, ergy and extent. directed against furthe
= exter sion Of Slavery in the United States
d The war between the United States an,
It Mexico, and the acquisition of the Mexican
l. Provinces of New Mexico and Upper Cali
l. fornia, the fruits of that war, were go i'm
d mediately and directly consequences of thu
e annexation of Texas, that all of those event
2. in fact may be regarded as constituting on
act of intergention in favor of Slave aho