Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1860-03-15

cerned. Every element q. the controvers,
now present entered II then; the rightfu-
ness or the wrongiulness Of Slavery; 'is
effects, present and iotuse; the Cons,itu.
tiopal authority Of Congress-; the claims of
the Federal Union. whetherit is a compact
between the States, or an Independent Gov.
ernment, the springs of its powers, and the
l;gatures upon their exercise. An these
were discussed with zehl and ability which
have never been surpassed. History tells
us, know not how truly, that the Union
reeled under the vehemence Of that great
debate. Patriotism took counsel from pro.
dence. and enfofced settlement which hqs
proved to be not final one; and which. as
is now seen, practically left open oil the
great political issues which were involved.
Missouri and Arksnsas were admitted as
capital States, while labor obtained, as a
reservation, the abridged but yet compre.
hensive Geld Of Kansas and Nebraska.
Now, when the present conditions Of the
various parts Of the h1u,sianian Territory
are observed, and we see that tapitsl retains
undisputed possession OF what It then OBJ
tanned, while labor is convulsing the coun-
try with so hard and so prolonged a strug-
gle to regain the lost equivalent which was
then guaranteed to it under circumstances
Of so great solemnity. we may well desire
not to be undeceived If the Missouri Coml
promise was indeed unnecessarily accepted
by the Free States influenced by exaggnra-
tions Of the dangers Of Disunion. The
-. AL ~ IT., Il. he oc
moment for ulterior use: ? r-.. irHlri aH
Firs,--That it is easy to combine the
capital States in defense of even external
interests, while /, is hard to unite the labor
States IN a common policy. q! 'fiN ''
Second--That the labor States have ma
tural loyalty to the Union, while the capi-
tai States have natural facility fot alarm
ing that loyalty by threatening Disunion.
Third-That the capital States do not
practically distinguish between Legitimate
and constitutional resistance to the exten.
sion Of Slavery in the common Territories
OF the Union, and unconstitutional aggres-
sion against Slavery established by local
laws in the capital States.
The early political parties were organic.
ed without reference TO Slavery. But since
1920, European questions have left US prac-
tically unconcerned. There has been great
increase Of invention mining. manufacture,
and cultivation. Steam on land and on
water has qnickened commerce. The press
and the telegraph have attained prodgious
activity, and the social intercourse between
the States and their citizens has been inn
mcusurably increased; and consequently,
their mutual relations affecting Slavery have
been, for many years, subjects Of earnest
and often excited discussion. 1t is in my
way ouly to show how such disputes have
operated on the course of political events
not to reopen them for argument he-e.--
There was slave insurrec,ion in Virginia.
Virginia und Kentucky debated. and, 10 the
great sorrow Of the Free States, rejected
the system OF voluntary labor. The Colon
ization Society was established with much
favor in the capital States. Emancipation
societies arose in the Free States. South
Carolina instituted proceedings to nnllify
obnoxious Federal revenue laws. The capi'
tai States complained Of Courts and Legis'
latures in the labor States for interpreting
the cons titutionai provision for the surrend
er of fugitives from service so as to treat
them as persons, and not property, and they
Disseminated against colored persons Of the
labor States when they come to the capita
States. They denied, in Congress. thu
right OF petition, and embarrassed or deniet
freedom of debate on the subject of slavery
Presses, which undertook the defense Of thu
labor system in the capital States, were sup
pressed by violence, and even in the labo
States, public assemblies, convened to con
slider slavery questions, were dispersed b.
mobs sympathizing with the capital States
The Whig party, being generally IN op
position party, prac,iced some forbaaranc
toward the interest OF labor The Demo
cratic party. not without demonstrations Q
dissent, was generally found sustaining th'
policy of capital. A disposition toward tn
removal Of slavery from the presence Of tn
national capital appeared in the District @
Columbia. Mr.. Van Buren,, Democrat
President, launched prospective vot
against the measure. A Democratic Con
gress brought Texas into the Onion, stipu
lsting practically Tor it's future reorgsniza
ton into four Slave States. Mexico wa
, incensed War ensued. The abor State
asked that the Mexican law Of liberty ,whic
covered the Territories brought in by III
treaty of peace, might remain and be col
1 frmed. The Democratic party refused :
. The Missouri debate Of 1920 recurred nov
0 under circumstances of heat and exciteme II
in relation to these conquests. The deien'
ers Of labor took alarm lest the number
q new capital States might become so gre'
e as to enable that class Of States to dictal
the whole policy of the Government, an
' in case OF constitutions al resistance. then
9 form new slaveholding confederacy arour
}. the Gulf of Mexico. By this time the cap
}. tai Sta,es seemed to have become fixed in
/. determination that the Federal Governmen
j. and even the labor States should recogni
If their slaves. though outside ot the Sla'
e States anG within the Territories OF Il
!. United States, as property of which u
n master could not be, in any way or by al
l. authority divested; and the labor State
IN having become now more essentially Dem
e, cratic than ever before, by the great develo
e, men, of free labor, more firmly than ev