CHAPTER IV.
THE CREATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MISSOURI
[The Growth of Slavery not Seriously Checked by the Prohibition of the Foreign Slave-trade]—[The General Government Powerless Against Slavery in the Existing Commonwealths]—[The Powers of the General Government in Respect to Slavery in the Territories]—[The Powers of Congress in the Admission of new "States" into the Union]—[Slavery in the Missouri Territory]—[The First Petition from Missouri Territory for the Permission to form a Commonwealth]—[The Second Petition, and the First Bill in Congress, for the Admission of Missouri]—[The Tallmadge Amendment to the Bill]—[Passage of the Amendment by the House of Representatives]—[Passage of the Original Bill by the Senate]—[The Missouri Bill during the Session of 1819-20]—[Mr. Taylor's Proposition]—[The Bill for the Admission of Maine Reported and Passed by the House of Representatives]—[The Failure of Mr. Taylor's Plan]—[The Missouri Bill again before the House of Representatives]—[Mr. Taylor's Amendment to the Bill]—[The Independent Missouri Bill of the Senate]—[The Refusal of the Senate to Disconnect the two Measures]—[The Conference on the Subject, and the First Missouri Compromise]—[President Monroe's Approval of the Compromise]—[Review of the Points Involved in the Contest]—[The Revival of the Missouri Struggle]—[The Missouri Constitution in Congress]—[Mr. Lowndes' Bill for the Admission of Missouri with the Instrument Unchanged]—[Defeat of the Lowndes Bill in the House]—[Passage of the Senate Bill with a Proviso by the Senate]—[The Senate Bill Tabled by the House]—[Mr. Clay and the Second Missouri Compromise]—[Passage of the Second Missouri Compromise Act]—[The General Effects of the Decisions Reached in the Missouri Question.]
| The growth of slavery not seriously checked by the prohibition of the foreign slave-trade. |
Already before the year 1819, as we have seen in the preceding chapter, had it become manifest that the influences and measures relied upon by the forefathers for the ultimate extirpation of negro slavery were not effecting the desired result in the Commonwealths south of the line of Pennsylvania and of the Ohio. It was evident that the revolutionary enthusiasm for universal liberty and the rights of man was not so strongly felt by the generation which grew up after "'76" as by the generation of "'76," that the laws against the importation of slaves were being evaded, and that the slaves were increasing by birth many times more rapidly than they were decreasing by emancipation and removal to the colonies of the American Society for Emancipation. Moreover, four new Commonwealths had been established—Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Mississippi—in which slavery was legalized, and a fifth—Alabama—was even then in process of creation. It was manifest from all sides to the friends of universal freedom that other means than those hitherto relied upon must be found, if any progress was to be made in the advancement of liberty, yea if the evident retrogression in respect to this prime element of political civilization was to be checked.
| The general Government powerless against slavery in the existing Commonwealths. |
All had been done by the United States Government, however, against slavery within the existing Commonwealths that the Constitution allowed. Before anything more could be undertaken, the Constitution itself would have to be so amended as to authorize it. The extraordinary majorities required for the initiation and adoption of amendments made it practically impossible to effect anything by such means. Of the thirteen original Commonwealths, seven had abolished slavery and six had retained it. To these had now been added four—Vermont, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois—in which slavery was forbidden, and five in which it was permitted—Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama—making thus the number upon each side the same. And although the population in the Commonwealths north of the line of Pennsylvania and the Ohio had outstripped, in increase, that in those south of this line by near half a million of souls in thirty years, and the representation in the national House of Representatives stood consequently in favor of the former section in the ratio of 104 to 79, still the method of representation in the Senate, and the equality in the number of the Commonwealths permitting, with those prohibiting, slavery, stood firmly in the way of any amendment of the Constitution, either favorable or unfavorable to the slavery interest.