tution, while all but two of the slave states had.

Now, mark the hypocrisy of the three New England Abolition states that voted to continue the inhuman slave trade for eight years longer than some of the slave states desired We continue our quotation:

MASSACHUSETTS STEALING NIGGERS.

Thus, for twenty years after the Constitution was formed, did Massachusetts, and the other New England states, prosecute the slave trade. Their slave merchantmen piratically tore from the coast of Guinea thousands of the unoffending natives, transported them through

"On the question to agree to the first part of the horrors and suffocation of the "Middle the report, as amended, viz:

""The migration or importation of such persons as the saveral states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Legislature [Congress] prior to the year 1808’—

"it passed in the affirmative:

"YEAS--New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia--7. "NAYS-New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Virginia-4."

Thus, it will be seen that if the three states which have all along been willing to break up the Union, on account of slavery, had went with their Northern sisters, and with the slave states of Delaware and Virginia, the vote would have stood right the reverse-4 for and 7 against the eight additional years of the trade which has been declared piracy by the laws of civilized nations.

Passage," and sold them for gold to the planters of South Carolina, Georgia, &c., and ever since the constitutional prohibition began to run they have been endeavoring to break up the Union, because the Southern states owned and worked the very slaves these abolition humanitarians stole from Africa and sold to them. Enough! We have no heart to further pursue so dark a subject.

There were dozens of plans submitted to the
original National Convention, embracing al-
most every conceivable variety and form of
Government. We have not space to notice
them all in detail, but will note the difference
between two plans submitted by Virginia and
New Jersey, respectively, as a sample of the
whole, that the reader may see something of
the difficulties in the way of compromise.
The Virginia plan proposed two branches of
Congress;

New Jersey a single branch.
Virginia-Legislative powers derived from

If there be efficacy in prayer, we trust that all good people will pray that Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire may cast the black beam out of their own eyes before they declare they see "disloyalty" in every mote in their neighbor's eyes. A little going back | the people; to "first principles" might teach them to be humble, even as a peacock doth drop his plumes when he beholds his own dirty feet!

We raise no complaint, even at this mode of compromising. It cannot be objected to even on such a subject, for without a compromise, no Union could have been effected. We only object to the subterfuge and subsequent display of hypocrisy.

The question may be raised as to the motive that then induced the three principal New England States to engage in the slave trade at all, or to desire its continuance. The answer is summed up in one compound word-selfinterest, which is the mainspring of all commercial transactions. For more than a century the ships of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and others, had been profitably engaged in the slave trade, which it was hard to relinquish, and twenty years promised more profits than twelve years. The very fact that they agreed to suppress it at all, shows that they then knew it to be as wrong as it is to-day.

New Jersey-same from the States.
Virginia-a single Executive;
New Jersey-more than one.
Virginia-that a majority of Congress could

act;

New Jersey-a small majority could control. Virginia-Congress to legislate on all National concerns;

New Jersey-only on limited objects.
Virginia-Congress to negative all State

laws;

New Jersey-Giving power to Executive to compel obebience by force.

Virginia-To remove Executive by impeachment ;

New Jersey-On application of majority of States.

Virginia-For establishment of inferior judicial tribunals;

New Jersey-No provision.

PREDICTION OF GEO. MASON.

"This Government will commence in a moderate aristocracy: It is at present impossible

nate in one or the other.

[See Elliott's Debates, 1, p. 496.

"GEO. MASON."

Our Government was not only created on the basis of compromise, but it has only been kept together up to the election of ABRAHAM LINCOLN by that spirit of compromise which brought its form and substance from the chaos

of the Confederation.

to foresee whether it will, in its operations | South Carolina. And in 1832 that state posiproduce a monarchy or a corrupt, oppressive tively bid defiance to the General Government, aristocracy-it will most probably vibrate some years between the two, and then termi- and resolved to resist its revenue law of 1828. At one time civil war seemed inevitable, but the firm, yet compromising spirit of General JACKSON, aided by the accommodating spirit of Henry Clay, soon allayed discontent and HENRY restored the relations of peace and obedience to law. South Carolina was opposed to all tariffs. The manufacturing states were for a high "protective" (prohibitory) tariff. Here was the two extremes. If neither had yielded, war was inevitable. One could not in "honor" yield wholly to the other. Hence, the "protectionists" yielded so as to bring the tariff to the supposed standard of revenue, while the nullifiers yielded their opposition to all tariffs, so as to consent to the revenue standard-and here was the common mean between the two extremes. Compromise accomplished in this what perhaps half a million of lives and five thousand millions of property could not accomplish, while subsequent history demonstrated

THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE.

In 1819 the cloud of dissolution arose from behind the Missouri question. Missouri asking and demanding to be admitted with her slavery constitution on the one hand, while the Abolitionists of the North declared she should never be admitted as a slave state. Here was

two extreme propositions. Neither party would yield wholly to the other, for that cannot be expected in any controversy. At least, few instances of the kind have been recorded by history. Both parties must yield something, or war and dissolution followed.

MR. CLAY'S COMPROMISE. Thus matters stood when Mr. CLAY, the great American champion of compromises, brought forth his celebrated Missouri compromise, which was finally incorporated into the Missouri Act of Admission, as the 8th section, and which consisted in drawing an imaginary line of 36 deg. 30 min. north latitude, to the western boundary of Missouri, and providing that slavery should never exist north of that line. This is what the Southern party yielded to the Northern party, in consideration of the Admission of Missouri as a slave state, with another condition that the article in the constitution prohibiting free blacks from settling in that State, should be stricken out. Under these provisions, Missouri was admitted as a State, by proclamation of President MONROE, in the summer of 1821-the people of Missouri, in the mean time having voted to accept the conditions of the compromise.

Thus, the Missouri imbroglio blew over, while parties busied themselves in getting up a new cause of irritation. They were not long in maturing their mischievous plans. The tariff of 1828, passed while the "Federal Republicans" were in power, was excesswere in power, was excessively offensive to the South, and especially to

the fact that that the basis of actual settlement was really more beneficial to both parties than either extreme would have been to either party.

GEN. JACKSON ON COMPROMISE.

As the spirit in which Gen. JACKSON treated this embroglio may be of some service to those who are not too mad to reason, we introduce it here, in the language of Col. BENTON:

*

"Such was the message which President Jackson sent to the two Houses in relation to the South Carolina proceedings, and his own to counteract them, and it was worthy to follow the proclamation, and commenced in the same spirit of justice and patriotism, and therefore wise and moderate. * * * His proclamation, his message, and all his proceedings, therefore, bore a two-fold aspectone of relief and justice, in reducing the measure to the wants of the Government, in the economical administration of its affairs-the other of firm and mild authority, in enforcing the laws against offenders. * * Bills for the reduction of the tariff-one commenced in the Finance Committee of the Senate, and one reported from the Committee of Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, and both moved in the first days of the session, favorable to the President, went hand in hand and by committees politically and personally with the exhortations in the proclamation, and the steady preparations for enforcing the laws. if the extension of justice and the appeals to Many thought that he ought to relax in his reason and patriotism should prove insufficient civil measures, for allaying discontent, while South Carolina held the military attitude of

* * *

armed hostility to the United States, and among them Mr. Quincy Adams. But he adhered steadily to his purpose of going on with what justice required for the relief of the South, and promoted by all the means in his power the success of the bills to reduce the measure, especially the bill in the House, and which being framed upon that of 1816, (which had the sup-foes of the compromise under consideration, is, port of Mr. Calhoun,) and which was (now that the public debt was paid,) sufficient both for revenue and the incidental protection which manufacturers required, and for the relief of The South, must have had the effect of satisfying every honest discontent, and of exposing and estopping that which would not."-Thirty | Years, p. 308.

1

This was the noble, yet firm and patriotic stand taken by Gen. JACKSON to cast water instead of pitch on the flames of civil discontent.

HENRY CLAY ON THE SAME SUBJECT.

The manly and patriotic sentiments uttered by Mr. CLAY when he introduced his compromise tariff bill, is a noble model of enlightened statesmanship, which is worthy of being framed in gilt to garnish the best statesman's library on the globe. He said:

passage through the Senate of the Enforcing
Bill.
It appears to me, then, Mr.
President, that we ought not to content our-
selves with passing the Enforcing Bill only.—
Both that and the Bill of Peace seem to me to
be required for the good of our country. * *
The difference between the friends and the
that they would, in the enforcing act send
forth ALONE a flaming sword-we would send
out that, but along with it the Olive Branch,
as a messenger of peace. They cry out, "The
law! The law!! The law!!! Power! Power!!
Power!!! We, too, revere the laws, and bow
to the supremacy of its obligation, but we are
in favor of the law executed in mildness, and
We
want no war-above all, no civil war-no fam-
power tempered with mercy.
ily strifes. We want to see no sacked cities-
no desolated fields-no smoking ruins-no
streams of American blood shed by American

arms.

* *

"Pass this bill-tranquolize the country, restore confidence and affection in the Union, and I am willing to go home to Ashland, and renounce public servic: forever. * * Yes, I have ambition! but it is the ambition of being the humble instrument in the hands of Providence, to reconcile a divided people-once more to revive concord and harmony, in a distracted land. The pleasing ambition of contemplating the glorious spectacle of a free, united, prosperous and practical people!"

The settlement of the South Carolina con

"Sir. I repeat, that I think South Carolina has been rash, intemperate, and greatly in the wrong, but I do not want to disgrace her, nor any other member of this Union. No, I do not desire to see the lustre of one single star dim-troversy left peace and all its fraternal blessmed of that glorious confederacy which consti-ings to flow uninterruptedly for eighteen years, tutes our political system. Still less do I wish till 1850-but the spirit of discord and the to see it blotted out and its light obliterated forever. Has not the state of South Carolina been one of the members of this Union in days

that 'tried men's souls?' Have not her ancestors fought alongside our ancestors. Have we not conjointly won many a glorious battle. If .we had to go into a civil war with such a state how would it terminate? Whenever it should have terminated, what would be her condition? If she should ever return to the Union what would be the condition of her feelings and affections? What the state of the heart of her

demon of dissolution were at work, and scarcely a month passed of this eighteen years that did not witness the utterance of some treason

able sentiment in favor of dissolution.

In the progress of events, and the fullness of our history, a war with Mexico not only settled a long pending controversy, over repeated insults, injuries and wrongs, but gave us New Mexico and California. The immediate and people? She has been with us before, when almost providential discovery of rich fields of her ancestors mingled in the throng of battle, gold in our newly acquired Pacific possessions, as I hope our posterity will mingle with hers stimulated emigration to such extent that Calfor ages and centuries to come, in the united defense of liberty, and for the honor and glory ifornia put in motion the whole machinery of a of the Union. I do not wish to see her degrad-State Government, and asked admission into ed or defaced as a member of this Confederacy."

Mr. CLAY's second speech in defense of his compromise bill was equally honorable and patriotic. Such a speech, made by the same man, now-a-days, would be pronounced, in "loyal" nomenclature, as "copperhead treason." Mr. CLAY said:

"This, or some other measure of conciliation, is now more than ever necessary since the

|

the sisterhood of states, as a free state.

The claims of that State were resisted by the slavery "balance-of-power?' men of the South, because there happened to be no slave State ready for admission as an offset, to keep up the political equilibrium between the two sections of our common country, so basely divided by political agitators on both sides of the line between slave and free states. In this the South had no constitutional cause of com

when it disbanded, and the "Free Soil" or abolition party drank in most of its members, and from that day to this the agitation has continued, wholly on a sectional basis. The re

mains for us, in this chapter, to perform the
unpleasant duty of considering
THE FRUITLESS EFFORTS TO COMPROMISE IN 1861.
Alas, CLAY, WEBSTER and BENTON-the
heroes of the compromise of 1850-were gone
to their final account. DOUGLAS was pros-
trate, and soon followed his old compeers-
CASS, at a ripe old age, had been retired from
the National counsels. Political agitators and
cheap politicians occupied their once honored
places.

plaint, because she had no constitutional right to demand that this "equilibrium" should be kept up. But the "occasion" gave to her politicians a pretext for complaint, which they lost no time in entangling with the slavery agita-sult need not be portrayed by us. But it retion generally. The bad faith of the North in reference to the rendition of fugitive slavesthe personal liberty bills that virtually rendered nugatory the fugitive law of 1793-were made to play their part in the budget of complaints, claims and counter claims, until the controvery became mixed with merit and demerit on both sides. The crisis at one time became alarming, when again shone forth, in all their brilliancy, and not in the least dimmed by age, the compromising qualities of CLAY, who with WEBSTER, CRITTENDEN, DOUGLAS, and such old Nestors of patriotic fame, became active to still once more the noises of faction, and who endeavored to dry up the fountains of discord by the system of compromise adopted in 1850. The measures known as the "compromise measures” (or omnibus) of 1850, were as fol

lows:

1st, The admission of California, with her

free Constitution. [In this the South yielded.] 2d. The erection of the territory of Utah, leaving the people to regulate their own affairs

[No particular yielding on either side.] 3d. The creation of New Mexico into a ter

ritorial government, with like provisions. [No

particular yielding on either side.]

4th. The adjustment of the Texas boundary question. [Claimed by abolitionists to have been a concession to the South.]

5th. Abolition of the slave trade in the District of Columbia. [Concessions by the South

to the North.]

6th. The amendments to the Fugitive Slave Law. [A concession in mode of operating, to the South, but no concession as to principle.]

These measures received the concurrence of such men as CLAY, WEBSTER, CASS, DOUGLAS, BENTON, DICKINSON, &c., and were considered as settling the whole controversy. Both the Democratic and Whig National Conventions of 1852, agreed most solemnly to stand by these compromises. But the radical element in the Whig party was turbulent, and refused to acquiesce, and immediately the agitation began. The radicals took the field with BIRNEY at, their head, in 1852, when the Whigs found themselves severely beaten. The party vainly struggled on, with little vitality, for two years,

The hour of trial came--the crisis, long accumulating its virus, had broken forth--the shock of dissolution was terribly felt. The causes that produced or hastened the black evils of the hour, belong not for us to canvass here. Go to the first fifty pages of this work and read for yourself. There you will find the cause. There, every line' is a sermontract an obituary. Could the authors of “all every sentence an oration--almost every exthis riot' be induced to filter and settle the waters they had riled--could prattling youth, stern manhood, ripe old age, or pleading wives, or agonized daughters and sisters, by

the loud tones of discontent, or the mute expostulations of fear, move the guilty authors of

the impending calamities to make an effort to

retrace their steps--to desist from acts of heated to a boiling temper the mad spirit of effrontery that stimulated exasperation, and heated to a boiling temper the mad spirit of faction--could these agitators be induced to pour oil on the troubled waters--in short, to compromise the jarring claims of faction, so as not, and we are left the mournful task of reto bless the world with peace? No, they could

cording the reasons

WHY THE RADICALS WOULD NOT COMPROMISE
IN 1861.

When the cloud of war broke forth in all its fury, as JEFFERSON predicted in 1821, all patriotic lovers of the Union strove to avert the evils, and to turn the tide of fratricidal war. Various were the efforts, and numerous the propositions to compromise our national differences, and to go on once more in the brotherly path of peace, possessing the manifold objects which invited us to untold blessings and hap