Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1861-02-07
THURSDAY FE BRUA RY alss

CLAIRSvILLE, BELM,
DsftwHnpsfS fss5 ~, - asssussf|
rcscues of slaves, was the food which evold-
ton riots In and grows fat upon But IL e
was even an true, would there be an excuse
for dissolving the Union2 Wouldthey have
law and order, would they respect the Con
stitution, and hvs.in . feeling Of brother
hood with their fellow countsymen2 They
would do nothing Of the kind. Tennessee
and Kentucky were Border States, and they
would have to bear the burthen Of the bat
tie and the heat of the day to protect the
States all down to the Gulf from whence q
sisvein escaping would have to travel over
six hundred miles Of slave territory before
he could hne sanctuary in the free States.
Prccipitate us, will you2 No; he would
prefer any other kind of "precipitasc', TO
that Then there was no fault to be found
with the fugitive slave law. Al United
States commissioner, appointed to carry ont
that law. . resident of the present Kingdom
of South Carolina, had assured him that the
present law was as stringent as human in
genuity could make it. And would you dis
solve the Union for that cause? He knew
that the Northern people were opposed to
the slave trade. They always had been,
and always would be. The Northern men,
born and educated in the free States, knew
nothing whatever of slavery, except what
they had heard Of IL from Garrison and
others But the strongest pro-slavery man
South was the Yankee who went down there
and married widow with plantation well
stocked with negroes But they could no
more hope to make the Northern people
pro-slavery, than they could hope to make
hungry politician run away from fat Of.
fee. Laughter. These precipitators say
that the Northern people, in some time to
come, intend to abolish slavery in the States
Hedid not beheve one ,eord Off and stand
ing there in his place, before that cro,cded au-
dience, he aro,oed that there ,cds not man
III the House aoho desires to abolish slavery il,
the States, or ,rho imagiaes they hare the
right to attempt It. [Cries from Republican
benches, "Not one, not one."] fthere was
such man, he desired to see him. Such
a man Would deserve the execration of his
colleagues, and the execration of every man
who respected the Constitution; and yet that
declaration to abolish slavery was made by
those precipitators in the teeth Of the most
solemn assurances that could bc given by q
political party. He asserted thatno political
party that had erer risen in the country had
given such strong and solemn guarantees to
respect slavery ,oithin the States: But Mii
fact ras suppressed by the politicians and
se,cspapers Of the country, and the opposite
doetrias ssaloaaly s,arsleated tato de ,.s.llsa.
mind. What more had the Republican pa r
ty done? That which no other party in the
country had formally done-they had deno,inc
ed, in the sererest and strongest terms, thai
such naios as that of John Brown into Kr
gina scee the greatest Of all crimes They
would not take the word fthat party, ant
to appease them the Republicans expires
their readiness to vote foran amendment il
the Constitution, which would bind then
never to interfere with slavery in the States
! 1t would in fact be no amendment, bu
would merely declare what the Constitution
now was and no man believed for momen
in their power to interfere with slavery un
der the Consultation as it was. They de
clared that the people in the respective sec
tions were not homogeneous, and that the
1 hated one another. That mightbe so, bu
: thatwopld pass away as they became bette
q Known But, he asserted, they did not hat
each other more than they had seen the Of
Wing and Democratic parties hate eac
$ other after each succeeding political contest
+ But would they love one another more afte
they were separated? That was the, que'
tion. They were going to separate, wel
7 they? And where would be the boundaries
7 The river Ohio, which, it was said was 'dl
d one half of the year., and frozen over IL
i other half, was the only barrier that woul
J. separate these hostile sections. If the
4 hated each other now, would they be four
n in fraternal embrace when they had separ'
r ted into rival and hostile confederacies? |?
e They hate each other Not u bit of it.
V Iftheir constituents could see how the fir
, soilers of the North and the radicals Of Il
d. South lived together, they would not belie'
al d word oft. They hate each otherP N
te only when the ''ins" had to give way
M the ''outs."i .[LAughter.l Yes,when I
ia army Of ofice-holders were seen cleari
III out, bag and baggage and makingwa
q, their triumphant successors. For his o'
ty part, IL any sacrifice he could make wo,
a save the country he would be glad to ma
ma it. But separation If they did separa
n would breed that hate which would lead
he feuds and contests as bloody and protrac'
Ia a. was the war between tho houses of Y,
wn and Lancaster. 90 Separate, break up
is- Government and let the central States
m pecipitated into this revolution against