Page:The History of Slavery and the Slave Trade.djvu/697

 sustained between the national and the territorial government, and may be remembered with feelings of gratitude and pride. We have fallen on different

times. A territory of our government is now convulsed with violence and discord, and the whole family of our nation is in a state of exitement and anxiety. The national executive power is put in motion, the army in requisition, and congress is invoked for interference.

In this case, as in all others of difficulty, it becomes necessary to inquire what is the true cause of existing trouble, in order to apply effectual cure. It is but temporary palliatives to deal with the external and more obvious manifestations and developments, while the real, procuring cause lies unattended to, and uncorrected, and unremoved.

It is said that organized opposition to law exists in Kansas. That, if existing, may probably be suppressed by the president, by the use of the army; and so, too, may invasions by armed bodies from Missouri, if the executive be sincere in its efforts; but when this is done, while the cause of trouble remains, the results will continue with renewed and increased developments of danger.

Let us, then, look fairly and undisguisedly at this subject, in its true character and history. Wherein does this Kansas territory differ from all our other territories, which have been so peacefully and successfully carried through, and been developed into the manhood of independent states? Can that difference account for existing troubles? Can that difference, as a cause of trouble, be removed?

The first and great point of difference between the territorial government of Kansas and that of the thirteen territorial governments before mentioned, consists in the subject of slavery—the undoubted cause of present trouble.

The action of congress in relation to all those thirteen territories was conducted on a uniform and prudent principle, to wit: to settle, by a clear provision, the law in relation to the subject of slavery to be operative in the territory, while it remained such; not leaving it in any one of those cases to be a subject of controversy within the same, while in the plastic gristle of its youth. This was done by congress in the exercise of the same power which moulded the form of their organic laws, and appointed their executive and judiciary, and sometimes their legislative officers. It was the power provided in the constitution, in these words: "Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." Settling the subject of slavery while the country remained a territory, was no higher exercise of power in congress than the regulation of the functions of the territorial government, and actually appointing its principal functionaries. This practice commenced with this national government, and was continued, with uninterrupted uniformity, for more than sixty years. This practical contemporaneous construction of the constitutional power of this government is too clear to leave room for doubt, or opportunity for skepticism. The peace, prosperity, and success which attended this course, and the results which have ensued, in the formation and admission of the thirteen states therefrom, are most conclusive and satisfactory evidence,