The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-05-02
THE POLICY OF 'Sa coNsUMMATED

mai aud important that has ever been won by the
democrstic party in the history Of country. 1t
win give to that partya new lease upon the conf
dsnce Of the republican masses Of the Union 1t at
tssta anew its conservative and national character,
and plans . new hope for the perpetuation of the
Union, in the heart Of the nation. q
The struggle which commenced in 1920. and, like
hrebell in the night, startled Mr. Jefferson in his
ropose 1t Monticello, has now reached conclusion.
The policy of strife which the Congress- of that day
inaugmsted, has At last been completely abrogatod
by this FINAL step, the substitution Of another based
on constitutional principles. The statute book no
longer stamps stigma Of nferiority and inequality
upon one section of the Union or another ; and so
fAr ~ tho idsa Of sections can continue, principle
~ bean established under which the victories of
of parsu and unequal legislation, but only of su-
perior capacities for physical and political develop
mcnt.
Az our federal system admits, in its technical or
ganism and theory Of wide and indefinite expansion
90 have we At last popularized rule of expansion
which in practice win allow the process to go on
without disturbing the mutual goodwill Of sections,
and ut no expense of ntcrsectional jealousy acri-
mony, aud collision. The history of this policy has
been ~ instructive the liberal practice Of it must
ofnecessity be benehcent. The Missouri proviso of
1920 was an arbitrary congressional usurpation and
installed system of congressional Intervention and
1justoe between sections in the development of new
States and the extension of the Union. The policy
which we have now inaugurated borrowing from the
constitution that principle of State rights which pre-
serves to tho matured States the exclusive right of
regulating their domestic affairs applies it to
cipient States in the act Of preparing for admission
into tho Union; and, necessary to fair and un-
trammelled exercise of this right prohibits Con-
gress from legisating on vexed domestic questions
during the territorial wnrdship of those States
binding that body to absolute non intervention.
Various have been the struggles of the democra-
cy against restrictive policies and laws They fought
for . FREQ currency, and an cmancipated system of
home trade, in their war upon mammoth national
bank which was vaunted to- DO regulator of both
They fought for an untrammeed foreign commerce in
wagng war upon tariff which limited and mana
cled while Boosting to protect that commerce.
They fought for thirty years against the power which
claimed for Congress by the fanatics of sec
the States Of the other section at war with their
free aud sovereign right to conduct their own do
,nestic concerns in their own way. In every form
in which measures Of arbitrary and unwarrantable
restriction have been attempted to bo imposed upon
tho free exercise by the people the States of
their Just franchises and wise discretion the democ-
racy have opposed them.
While their struggle against arbitrary restriction
has been and arduous in each of the contests
We have just named, their triumph has been CON-
paratively easy; the mature reflection and sober
thought Of the people having wrought out brilliant
victory for them in the Of time in each Of those
controversies But their struggle resisting the effort
of Congress to impose restrictions upon tho domestic
policy Of the now States OF tho West in advance Of
their organization and settlement has cost them moro
exertion than all tho others combined In an unfor-
tunate moment, consulting wretched considerations
Of temporary expedency, rather than tho living and
enduring principles Of tho constitution this policy
sngrafed upon the Legislation of the country, in
the adoption Of the Missouri restriction. A long
lapse Of time interviewed before circumstances
occurred to test the suficiency Of this expe
dent In the hour Of trial it was found to be
unavaing to that peace for which it had been
devised. Like all moro expcdients it failed of its
object II was an arbitrary restriction that rested
on no broad just principle; and which in fact re-
pudated all principle 1t was assaulted and violated
by the very fanatica party who, when, by their own
act, it had become null and imperative, pretended
indignation afterwards when it was formally erased
from the statute book. 1t was abrogated in
fact by those who afterwards howled when il be-
came necessary to abrogate it in terms and form.
II was reserved for the democracy, by natural
law Of their organization, and as logical result
Of their national and catholic principles to re-
move this restriction from the statute book Cir
curnstances had allowed it to remain a long time
law. Of the land; and, like many other unwise
measures which had preceded it in English and
American history, il had become in some sort conse-
Grated by time. The subject slavery which it in
volved had also grown into chronic source Of sec.
honai irritation. The agitation of the subject had
for long time been the whole capital in trade of
the fanatic, the demagogue, and tho incendiarv II
had to control the whole politics Of the coun
try; il built up aud broke down politicians II mado
aud unmade administrations.
twas not merely necessary for the democracy 10
destroy the Restriction, but to establish policy in
lien of it, based constitutional principle in har-
IA.