nature of a declaration of trust undertaken by the
Congress of the Confederation with the granting States.
The article “was agreed to without opposition;”
but almost contemporaneously, in the sessions of that
convention which framed the Constitution, debate waxed
hot upon the topic which was then seen to present
grave obstacles to union. It was true that many
of the wisest Southerners of that generation regarded
the institution as a menacing misfortune; they however
could not ignore the fact that it was a “misfortune”
of that peculiar kind which was endured with much
complacency by those afflicted by it; and it was equally
certain that the great body of slave-owners would resent
any effort to relieve them of their burden. Hence
there were placed in the Constitution provisions in
behalf of slavery which involved an admission that
the institution needed protection, and should receive
it. The idea of protection implied the existence
of hostility either of men or of circumstances, or
of both. Thus by the Ordinance and the Constitution,
taken together, there was already indirectly recognized
an antagonism between the institutions, interests,
and opinions of the South and those of the North.
Slowly this feeling of opposition grew. The first
definite mark of the growth was the struggle over
the admission of Missouri, in 1820. This was
settled by the famous “Compromise,” embodied
in the Act of March 6, 1820, whereby the people of
the Territory of Missouri were allowed to frame a
state government with no restriction against slavery;
but a clause also enacted that slavery should never
be permitted in any part of the remainder of the public
territory lying north of the parallel of 36 deg. 30’.
By its efficiency during thirty-four years of constantly
increasing strain this legislation was proved to be
a remarkable political achievement; and as the people
saw it perform so long and so well a service so vital
they came to regard it as only less sacred than the
Constitution itself. Even Douglas, who afterward
led in repealing it, declared that it had an “origin
akin to the Constitution,” and that it was “canonized
in the hearts of the American people as a sacred thing.”
Yet during the long quietude which it brought, each
section kept a jealous eye upon the other; and especially
was the scrutiny of the South uneasy, for she saw
ever more and more plainly the disturbing truth that
her institution needed protection. Being in derogation
of natural right, it was peculiarly dependent upon
artificial sustention; the South would not express
the condition in this language, but acted upon the
idea none the less. It was true that the North
was not aggressive towards slavery, but was observing
it with much laxity and indifference; that the crusading
spirit was sleeping soundly, and even the proselyting
temper was feeble. But this state of Northern
feeling could not relieve the South from the harassing
consciousness that slavery needed not only toleration,
Print
Word
PDF
