Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1864-06-21
QDblo Statesman.
g ~ a. From The Worldl rq
The Lost The Slavery
1..a Question I'm a Nut Shell.

The proposed amendment to the Con-
stitution, for the universal abolition OF
slavery In the United States, failed In the
House of Representatives for want OF
the requisite two-thirds, by the concentra-
tion Of the Democratic vote against It.
The sober second-thought of the people
will indorse the actien of the Democratic
members. Without feeling, themselves
judges of the constitutional metaphysics
that entered into the debate, the people will
sanction the rejection on the broad and solid
principles of common sense. Some of these
we will proceed to state.
The people appreciate the rapidly accu-
mulating burdens of an exhaustiDg war;
they judge it for the interest of the coun-
try that the war shall not be unnecessarily
prolonged. The North must, indeed, fight
until the South submits. We are spending
money and blood to procure submission
The people have an interest in beating
down the price of this costly submission,
but none in enhancing it. The main con-
sideration with them is, whether the pro-
posed amendment would render the war
more costly, or less costly; longer, or
shorter. That is, in other words, would its
effect on the temper Of the South be favor
able to submission, or to defiance? To ask
this question is to answer it. Such meas
ure would obviously protract the duration
and enhance the cost of the war; it is there
fore unfit to be at this time adopted.
The practical effect of such an amend
ment would make it 0bligdtory on the Gov
ernment to prosecute the war for the mere
extinction of slavery. NOu, the Govern
ment has an option. If the South would
come back on condition that nothing more
should be required of them than submis-
sion to the Constitution as it stands, there
Is, at present. no impeachment to receiving
them except as it exists i'm the will of our
rulers. But pass this amendment, let ID be
ratified, and war for the extinction of slavery
would become constitutional obligation.
IT it required war of thirty years to ac-
complish the object, our rulers would be
bound by ther.oaths of Office to lay upon
our shoulders the mighty burden. If, at
the end of five years, or ten years, the re-
volted States would be willing to return to
their old place i'm the Union, with their old
rights, the Government would not even be
at liberty to consider their proposal; it
would be compelled to subject our people
to grinding taxation to maintain war of
mere philanthropy.
1t is iudicious for the government and the
people to preserve their present liberty of
action. Two years more experience of our
accumulating burdens may make the north
ern people unanimous in willingness that
the South should come back by a simple
resumption of allegiance. 1t would be in
opportune and unfortunate if just at that
moment, we found ourselves bound, hand
and foot, in the strong fetters of newly
adopted constitutional prohibition, and
compelled to refuse submission which we
would, if at liberty, gladly accept.
The proposed amendment will not bear
examination, even on its philanthropic side.
For what is slavery? 1t is for Others to eat
bread in the sweat of the laborer's brow
Already, the white laborer of the North is
compelled to labor one hundred and fifty
out Of the three hundred working days in
the year, for the support of the Government.
A laborer taxed to the amount of half his
earnings is half slave; half of what he
produces by the sweat of his brow is an
others and not his. Let the war go on
till, instead of hundred and fifty, he has
only fifty days in the year which he can
truly call his own, and then he is as much
aslave as the transfer of his earnings to
others can make him. Is it Just to degrade
white men to the level of slaves for the sake
of freeing the negroesp When the laboring
man shall clearly perceive that the war is
prosecuted for that object and shall clearly
understand the consequences to himself he
will prefer his own advantage to that of the
negro. Admit the equal value of the black
and the white man, and you cannot justify |
the sacrifice of the latter to free the former. |
The proposal of this amendment by the |
Republicans settles out of doubt their in |
tention to prosecute the war for the mere |
abolition of slavery. 1t also evinces their |
consciousness that the prosecution Of the |
war for such an object is unconstitu- |
tional. They wish to amend, and SO get a |
constitutional sanction for what they are |
determined at all events to do. If they |
could carry the amendment, they would |
thereby compel all succeeding administra-
tions to continue the war for the same pur-
pose for which they wish to prosecute it.