Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1860-07-26
The Dnalism of Labor!

tional strife between the dual forms of labor
in the Territories Of the United States, the
voluntary and the forced, or rather the free
and the slive. that now promises to be
finally composed.
The reader will run his memory back to
the various events that have marked the
career OF this internecine strife, until he
comes down 10 the Kansas struggle, and he
will find IL alwsys turned upon the point,
which form of labor should prevail in the
Territories OF the Unionl In other words,
there has been an "Prrepfessible conflict"
between free and slave labor in the Terri
tories, . dualism of labor; which Mr.. Cal
hrun insugurai ed in his splendid Senatorial
sarangues, shortly after he found that he
was re pudiated for the Presidency by Penn
syNanis, notwithstanding he wss the father
Of the Protective System, SO essential to
the development; Of her interests. o'f
Had General Taylor lived, that frstricidal
strife would have been composed upon the
basis of Territorial popular sovereignty and
the non.intervention OF the Federal Govern
rhent in behslf OF slave labor. Messrs
Tuombs and Stephens, Of Georgia. then
members of the House of Representatives,
and supporters Of General Toy!or's Admin
i.,ration, parted company with him upon
This question. They wanted Intervention
and protection for slavery, and when they
threatened Disunion, lie deied them to raise
the standard of rebellion telling them he
would appear in Georgia alone, and unfold.
ing one of,he bullet pierced flags Of Buena
Vista, and, with ragged negro boy at his
side beating the drum, he would rally to his
standard the gallant Unon.loving men Of
that State, and hang every traitor higher
than Hamen! The voice Of Disunion was
never after that heard in the White House,
while old Zack lived.
He died. The Compromise Act Of 1850
followed. 1t was set aside, and the labor
conflict broke out anew in 1854. The dual
Ism Of labor became a stalking horse for the
Presidency, and Mr.. Douglas mounted it in
eager haste. In order to win the confidence
Of The friends Of slave labor in the Terri
tories, he broke down the solemn compact
of 1920 between the two forms Of labor, and
revived the Taylor doctrine Of Popular Sow
ereignty, but deprived il Of its efficacy by
placing it at the disposition OF the Supreme
Court, which, he knew, would decide in
favor of snvery in the Territories, while the
Executive Government was at the same
time also in slavery hands.
At last, a great battle was fought and
won on the plains Of Kansas, in the inter-
es's Of free labor, Notwithstanding It had oil
tAs'dspartments OF the Federal government
sgsinst it, but the result Of that terrible
conflict is the everlasting disruption Of the
Democratic party, that favored the cause Of
slave labor in the Territories, with Douglas
as its leader, and now the country Is called
upon to pronounce final sentence In the
premises, and either to set aside or confirm
the decree already gone forth, in favor Of
free labor.
But how stand the combatants now upon
the Presidential fed, in relation to this
question OF labor! The nominations are oil
made, the platforms enounced, and the &c.
ceptanees Of the candidates are published.
Stripes OF their verbiage and reduced to
plain English, the principles represented by
the candidates, In regard TO the dualism of
labor, may be briefly summed up thus:
l.. Breckin: idge and Lane represent the
dogmas that the Federal government has
been decided By the Supreme Court, to be
Of itself essentially'a slavery government, +,
that the Constitution carries and projects
slavery wherever ii is In force, whether on
the land or on the high seas, that the laws
lorbiddipg free trade in Cor, ign slaves are
contrary 20 the Constitution, that the Fed
ersl government, in oil its dephrtme nts, Is
bound now to protect slavery in all the
Territories against all adverse Territorial
legislation, or any other form Of hostility to
II, tha, all State legislation interdcting the
bringing cf slaves within its limits, whether
for residence or in irdnSitu, are unconstiiu.
tional--in fine that slave labor is the law
Of the land and free labor the exception.
Q. Douglas ind Johnson hold precisely
The same doctrines, with this diiferance,
that while Douslns Is willing to bow to the
decision OF the Supreme Court, whatever that
INST be, upon the question, whether slave or
free labor 10 the law Of the land. and all It's
corollaries. he contends that the Court has
not yet sdjud ichted the question at issue
and 60 he submits his dogma Of Popular
Sovereignty to The future disposition Of the
Supreme Court, knowing that it's present
constitution 10 In favor Of the friends of
slave labor. Eut Johnson goes ,o-the full
extent Of the Brechinrldgs and Lane dog
mas.
o Lincoln and Hamlin stand upon the
principles, that the Federal government is
psr se an anti.slavsTv government--thatt the
Constitution does not Of itself carry slavery
into free Territory--does not recognize
property In man, but treats slavery ss per. |
sonsl relntion-- that free labor 10 tho law of
the land and slave labor the exception--tha,
slavery 10 the creation Of local law, and can
only look Tor protection 10 the lea loci--thus
the Federal government has no righ, or
power to extend slavery into free Territory
nor TO protect il where--that the States
have a supreme right to ipterdict slavery
from coming into their limits, either per.
msnently orin passing through-snd tha,
the whole subject Of slavery In the Terrific
ries 10 within the supreme control Of Con.
gress. to be dealt with at i,s discretion
{. Bell and Everett stand, In effect, upon
the BreekiLiidge and Lane platform, bu,
they would remove the whole question o.