The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1861-09-04

The August number of the CornhW Nagqsiae
contains elaborate article on "The Dissolution
ofthe Uniou' which is written, as it processes, TO
rectiy public opinion in Great Britain, and espe-
cially to correct the erroneous views and state
ments OF the ill-informed periodical press of Eng
land upon American affairs. ain order TO under
''stand the matter" Of slavery, it informs us, I'll
sis necessary to say a few words as to the Con-
''stitution OF Congress-" These few words it CON-
mences with the important disclosure that Coach
State has. in the House of Representatives, one
'membev for every 90, 900 inhabitants" 1t then
proceeds TO history, and gets as far as the Ordi
nance of1787, which it places "soon after the re-
"cogniton of independence, and calls ian ar.
arrangement" to the effect ''that slavery should
'never be established on the lands thrown into
ga common stock" 'Whether or no this arrange
'ment was constitutional is question, =" it adds
(which has been much discussed"-a singular fact
in view of the other fact that the Constitution wa.
not in existence when the Ordinance was passed -
''Seyeral States, including Ohio, Kentucky and
Others" it goes on to say were formed out Of the
lands in question.
"The names of the Missouri Compromise Mason
:" 8 Dries line, &C." it states, care familiar
ITO us all, but hardly any one attaches any def
mite meaning to them" 1t, therefore, proceed;
to explain what their definite meaning is and
winds up by stating that Missouri snltimatelv,
''was admitted as a slave State; but, at the same
''time,i was provided that slavery should be pro-
'hibited in every other part Of the Union north o,
1860 30/ north latitude, (,cLch is hao,cn as jHu8on
I'd. iIifs Hne.) This arrangement was made
Sin 1919 and is the we'll known Missouri Com
"promise'
writer, so strong On the facts of the case,
cannot be otherwise than very forcible upon the
questions of principle involved. OF this Il single
illustration will suffice. H is considering the
argument of the South, which bases the right of
that section to establish government for ITSELF
upon the doctrines Of the Declaration of Indepen-
oence and the principles on which our existing
government was founded. Upon this point. his
views are so original as to deserve REPRODUCTION
in his own language viz:
mere are several Independent answers to This ar,r
ouirers or 0 20 prevent either bnna tide in
place, 1t proves nothing, for the qussti on s M
&c americans are consistent but tUhtier fhc, are r1bt
a as aohether they are taking The which is 9 ~
1ohofe best and 'oises To charge them with
even the charge true could produce nothing
put irritation; for il such charge ont i1
would come to this: Won are quite right in irving to
reduce the South to obedience but You must admit that
sr pSspes Whsh your grandthers fought in I776
" tiey are right. 1VhGt The use of gera1
mem ABOUT their grdndf1hers9 ftbey are ,oa1 ,rJ3
,So re I1geay Of convincing Them 1y under9Eing
20 Shoo hrtMs error is condemned bn The eyo1ons ~
their graTdtdthers? The qohole drgup9ent ;s ;gSog
dice and rancour.n " Ne"'i"s preJu-
In other words-when The North desires to re-
duce the South to obedience under the Cons,;,,-
ton, the question, whether in doing so it is no,
subverting the principles on which the Govern
ment was formed and is based, is a mere question
of consistency, and not Of right--and to remind
the Northern people of the Declaration of Indepen-