Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1860-04-07

we must perform as lar rs we can, ana rs much as
in US lies
The first thing that occurs to my mind is this
question: is it Mt all probable that we can, either
of us, induce the other to adopt our system Of So
ccty! Argue it as long we please, spend as
much Of our time and breath about it MS we may.
in commentator of the respective systems which
we represent, and to which we belong, after all, |
believe there is very little reason to suppose that
in this Hall one party will be able TO induce the
other to adopt its system. 1t is not very likely, il
is not very probable. Whenever the system of
either party is attacked, and its weaknesses at
tempted to be exposed, each may stand on the de-
icnsiye, and that is well enough f so be that 1t is
conducted in appropriate spirit, and with that
courtesy and urbanty which should become the
places that We occupy in this, which ought to be
regarded MS august body.
1t will hardly do to say that these two conditions
Of society cannot exist in the same nation. There
is a co-existence in the same nation. There is an
other kind of cO-eXistence in the same municipal
government. They are not the same thing.
fancy that, after an experiment of eighty years or
more, we may at least say that they exist, and
prosperously, too, in the same nation The lesson
of our own experience teaches as much MS that
these two conditions can exist, and exist prosper
ously, in the same nation. But when say that,
we should recollcct that the word "natiOn" rs mp
Piled to people like ours, is II term composed of
an aggregate Of separate nations, in one sep
nrnte sovercigntes; and ali the internal and mu
nicipal regulations to which the condition of soce-
ty belongs, fall appropriately and exclusively with
in the jurisdiction of the local authorities of the
Sovereign States.
Then there may he wcll-shaped and well-con-
Quoted nation, with one condition of society, in one
municipality, and anothsr in another State. They
may both bc prosperous within the same nation ;
but after all, they co-exist in the same mu-
nicipal government That is truism, per-
haps. 1t requires one simply to state it to appre
hend it. | say a State cannot he q non-slaychold-
ing State at the same timc and may say, may
add with equal truth, that think our experience
shows us that, under territorial government, a
Territory cannot hc at the same time n slavehold-
ing and free Territory. | believe that expert
ment has been attempted and it is a failure; the
thing cannot be- 1t would seem to be very obvious
on the mere statement 1t would involve para
dox.
Well, now, sir, what shall we do with this coun-
try, having these two conditions of society spread
over it and existing in it? What il our duty in
relation to the matter! We have no quarrel or
diihculty in relation to slavery, far it exists
within the separate States 1t exists under the OPP
GRAFTON and protection of the governments of those
separate States, peaceably and quietly. But the
question arises, what shall we do in relation to it
when we come to the territory which lies cut of
and beyond the jurisdiction Of the several States
We must keep the peace about it; it must be ar
ranged in some way. What can we do with it -
How can we get along with it, quietly and peacea-
bly,! think we, like any other people, might be
enabled, If we were so inclined, to draw some les
sons of advantage from our own experience, and
from the history of our own country. We are apt
TO forget, III the hurry of new and untriel expert
ments that after all, experience is the safest guide
for to-day and the safest guide for truth. Wespeak
of our fathers-they who established this Govern
ment. How did they manage it Is it not well
enough for us occasionally to look Mt the old way
and ascertain how it was The further we get in
to difficulty the more troubles we experience in
trying new modes and new experiments, the more
we ought to be inclined to see how this matter was
managed originally, and how that management
~-~--~i-I IT, ---~ "a, .L;-l ..~.i;-s -
more clear, candid examination, than that
they looked upon slavery great evil So adj
mis Mr. Calhoun himself; undoubtedly it was true.
No man disputes that now. How did they propose
to manage it' 1t was in this way: the OLD Com
gress Of the Confederation was sitting at the time
the convention was sitting in Philadelphia. In
that Confederation Congfess they acted in relation
to the then known and then owned territory of the
United States, lying out Of and beyond the limits
Of the separate States; and. in providing Gov
ernment for it, enacted that slavery involuntary
seryitude, except for crime, should not there exist
it was entirely forbidden That provision was
handed over and duly notified to the convention
that was sitting to form the Constitutions; sitting
cotemporaneOusly. They understood that, and it
was in no way disapproyed by them. They proyd-
ed in the Constitution that Congress should have
power "to make ali needful rules and regulations"
for the disposition Of the territory and other prop
erty Of the United States; thus bestowing on the
new proposed Government the power Of control
over the Territories, and they Immediately exer-
csed 1t in the First Congress, by legitmating and
adapting the provisions Of the ordinance of 1887
to the then existing form Of government
There was another thing. They did not look
upon slavery then as n mere local matter-a mat
ter Of mere local interest. The nation provided
for the Northwest Territory; but that was not all.
1t was then undoubtedly the general prevailing
opinion that if they cut oil the supply of slaves by
prohibiting the African slave trade, and limited
the extent Of territory in which slavery should ex-
ist, by cUntining it to its then existing limits, it
wonld finally die out There is no doubt that they
entered upon that experiment. They vested in
Congress the power, after 1908, to which time the
extreme Southern States then desired to continue
the trade, to cut off that foreign supply-to cut
of the African slave trade; and they had in the
ordinance of 1887, the continuance Of which the
new Constitution contemplated provision for
limiting the extent of territory in which it should
prevail.
have been charged over and over-I can re-
member Mt least three times, by three different
gentlemen in the Senate, in the progress Of this
discussion-with having said, which was true, that
belieyedthe more limited the extent Of territory
to which slavery confined the sooner it would
come to an end The honorable Senator from AL
ALBANIA, (Mr Clay.) the honorable Senator from
North Carolina, Mr. Clingman,) and | believe,
other gentlemen, have seemed to think that in ap-
proving Of that sentiment, | am Aboliionist
and one Senator says that is nothing more nor less
than plan to smoke than out-not very elegant
expression. Have | entertained any new thought
on that subject desire to call attention for one
moment to single remark made by the Senator
FROM Virginia at this session. Mr. Mason said on
the 23d of January, speaking of those who made
the Constitution:
81 believe this was their opinions their prejudice
aimed against the foreign Slave trade the African
slave trade, and their belief was that by cutting that
oil, slavery would die out of ITSELF without any act Of
abolition. attempted at one time to show, by the
recorded opinions of Mr. Madison, that the famous or.
dinance of 1857, far it prohibited slavery in the
territory northwest Of the Ohio, was aimed at the At
ricnn slave trade, and aimed at that alone the idea
being that if they could restrict the area into which
slavery could be Introduced from abroad they would
to that extent prevent the importation of slaves; and
that, when it was altogether prevented, the condition
of slavery would die out of itself; but they were moi
Aboonists, far less within the meaning and spirit Of
the Aboitonist Of the present day"
That is the view | wish to present, in shorter
words They entertained the idea that if the ma
tion would cut off the foreign supply, and would
-