There was as yet no hard and fast line drawn between North and South among the men of the Western waters.  Their sense of political cohesion was not fully developed, and the same qualities that at times made them loose in their ideas of allegiance to the Union at times also prevented a vivid realization on their part of their own political and social solidarity; but they were always more or less conscious of this solidarity, and, as a rule, they acted together.  Most important of all, the slavery question, which afterwards rived in sunder the men west of the Alleghanies as it rived in sunder those east of them, was of small importance in the early years.  West of the Alleghanies slaves were still to be found almost everywhere, while almost every where there were also frequent and open expressions of hostility to slavery.  The Southerners still rather disliked slavery, while the Northerners did not as yet feel any very violent antagonism to it.  In the Indiana Territory there were hundreds of slaves, the property of the old French inhabitants and of the American settlers who had come there prior to 1787; and the majority of the population of this Territory actually wished to reintroduce slavery, and repeatedly petitioned Congress to be allowed the reintroduction.  Congress, with equal patriotism, and wisdom, always refused the petition; but it was not until the new century was well under way that the anti-slavery element obtained control in Indiana and Illinois.  Even in Ohio there was a considerable party which favored the introduction of slavery, and though the majority was against this, the people had small sympathy with the negroes, and passed very severe laws against the introduction of free blacks into the State, and even against those already in residence therein. [Footnote:  “Ohio,” by Rufus King. pp. 290, 364, etc.] On the other hand, when Kentucky’s first constitutional convention sat, a resolute effort was made to abolish slavery within the State, and this effort was only defeated after a hard struggle and a close vote.  To their honor be it said that all of the clergymen—­three Baptists, one Methodist, one Dutch Reformed, and one Presbyterian—­who were members of the constitutional convention voted in favor of the abolition of slavery. [Footnote:  John Mason Brown, “Political Beginnings of Kentucky,” 229.  Among the men who deserve honor for thus voting against slavery was Harry Innes.  One of the Baptist preachers, Gerrard, was elected Governor over Logan, four years later; a proof that Kentucky sentiment was very tolerant of attacks on slavery.  All the clergymen, by the way, also voted to disqualify clergymen for service in the legislatures.]

In Tennessee no such effort was made, but the leaders of thought did not hesitate to express their horror of slavery and their desire that it might be abolished.  There was no sharp difference between the attitudes of the Northwestern and the Southwestern States towards slavery.