The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1860-02-24
"THE ATTITUDE OF PARTIES
A SPEECH DELIVERED BY
FRANCIS P. BLAIR. JR. ,.0F MISSOURI,
In the Cooper Institute. New York.
JANUARY %, 1860.


party to address the country through its all
pcrvading metropolis on the important issues
of an epoch, which all believe will influence
its destiny for ags, is high and honorable
distinction, of which am profoundly sensi.
BILE. owe this prominence to Missouri, and
to the attitude she holds iD The very heart of
the republic. Her introduction into the Un-
ion was signalized by pacifcatiOn which
was hailed bypatriots everywhere, but espec-
ially in the South, rs guieting forever con-
trovcrsy about disturbing domestic institu-
ton, at war with the elements of freedom,
which imbued at ebcginning the State and
National Governments. That compact OF
peace to which she set her seal rs tho party
most interested, was broken without having
first taken vote of her people to Indicate
her wish on question touching 80 nearly
her honor, as wellas herintcrcsts. Now the
vital enquiry rccurs again-what is to be
done to give rcpose to the discordant element
among our institutions, which has destroyed
the compact on which it rested, carried civil
war into the Territory from which, by agree
mcut, it was self-excluded, and now daringy
threatens to crush the Union itself, unless
permitted to command in the choice OF the
Chief Magistrate of the United States. How
ever glozing politicians may sophisticatc
about the old doctrine of the power OF Con-
grcss over the Territories-the new one,
which would give it to the first settlers, and
take il from the representatives OF the whole
people in Congress, and that still newer one
which would take it from both and resign il
to the Supreme Court-no man can honestly
deny tho blunt sta atement have made Of the
all-controlling events which have produced
the present hostile array of parties, nor the
issue which the aggressive party throughout
this contest now presents as its ultimatum.
Missouri has ever been Republican State,
Republican in that sense in which Jefferson
employed the term to define the party which
elevated him TO power. She owes her birth
to Jefferson and the Republican party-that
liberal party which acquired the Mississippi
and the far West, and the shores of the Pa
cifc, and devoted all to the Union. Do the
Republicans Of the present day maintain the
same liberal principles which marked the ca
recr of Jefferson in all its aspects, or do mod
ern Democrats moro thoroughly adhere to
what were then held as tho essentials of Re-
publicanism? This is question which his
tory will settle; will not now invoke TINT
umpire to pass upon the resemblance which
existing parties bear to the Republican par
ty of JetiersOn's time, except us to that pc
culiar feature which has such power over
those in love with il, as to turn by its aspect
everything for them into its own likeness
L. ,,,t ha of nI
the peculiar institution" that concerns
the Government Of the country, that is not
shaped, tingcd, and controlled by it? The
Constitution will not be allowed to exist
without it. The Union must be broken down
if it stands in the way of its extension: Con-
gross must sacrifice the time. honorcd COM
pact universally received by successive gen.
crations us imposing a just limit upon such
extension. The President must give all his
influence, and the force of all his civil func-
tionarics, sustained by the military power,
to cocrce the reluctant mass of emigrants to
admit slavery among them, and the Supreme
Court must reverse all its precedents to cs-
tablish the principle that slavery, as an in
stitution, is the property Of Shareholders.
which they may carry with them wherever
they have the right to 60 themselves. Now,
was this the Republican doctrine of the days
of Washington and jefferson? Was it the
doctrine of both the first and last Congress
Of the Confederacy that undertook to exclude
slavery by the ordinance regulating" the
Territories? Was it the doctrine of the Con.
stitution, which used the very word regulate,
as used in the Congress OF Confederation in
cxertng the power to confer it upon the Con.
gress of the Union? Was it the doctrine Of
the next Congress conyoked by Washington,
which confirmed, and with his signature, the
ordinance of 1887? Was it the doctrine OF
every President, Cabinet, Congress, or Court,
of the United States down to Pierce's time,
all having contributed in either passing,
signing, or recognizing in their appropriate
spheres, the organization Of every Territory
under the ordinance excluding slavery? The
whole history of the Republic from its foun-
dation shows that slavery was held TO bc
local institution, to be tolerated only in those
States into which it had been thrust, and
which were gradually to be relieved from the
incubus rs the growth of the white popula-
ton rendered the substitution of free labor
possible. History does not hand down the
name of man who contributed to build up
our Republican Government, who declares
himself for tho pcrpctuation and Propaga,-
ton of slavery. The embodied South mark
ed its rcprobation OF tho institution in con-
scnting to the abolition Of the African slave
trade. and by branding it as apiracy: WASH
ington declared the sentiment Of all his en-
lishtened countrymcn when he wrvte to la
fayctte, and through him to Europe, that he
looked forward to time when our Union
would become ga confedency of Free
States ~ and jefferson later and mere en-
pbatically admonshed the South that this
must be 50, or tho fate Of St. Domingo await
cd it.
To what is retrograde impulse in por-
ton Of our people to be attributed? Not,