contrary—and hold them there—first, for a definite time,
say seven years; next, for an indefinite period in perpetuity. That will restore slavery to the North and enable the sons of New England to return to their native land with their "chattels personal." Perhaps it will require no Act of Congress to do this—and "supersede" the Ordinance of 1787, or declare it "inoperative and void." The whole may be done any day by the Supreme Court of the United States; any day when the President shall say, "Down with you, judges. Do as you are bid." Whigs and Democrats can do all things through money, which strengtheneth them! will the North consent? Why not, nothing is so supple as the Northern neck.
II. Then the South will seek more slave territory. Here is what is wanted:—a part of Mexico,—the Gadsden treaty stipulates for about 39,000,000 acres, eight States as large as Massachusetts; Cuba, which the slave power has long coveted; Porto Rico; Hayti, which the Democratic Christians hate with such bitterness; Jamaica and the other West Indies; the Sandwich Islands; other parts of the Northern and Southern continent. Slavery must be put in all these places. Will the North consent? Why not? habit makes all things easy. What an excellent "field for religious enterprise" Hayti would be, if this Republic should restore slavery to St Domingo! Conquer your prejudices!
III. Then she will seek to restore the African slave- trade. Here are the steps. 1. to authorize any State to import slaves; 2. to authorize any individual to do so in spite of the adverse laws of any State, which will be declared "inoperative and void," or "superseded." I can foresee the arguments for the measure—Whig and Democratic—Yes, the theological arguments, drawn from the Bible, from "conscience and the Constitution." Some future Unitarian Doctor of Divinity, I suppose, for a "consideration" will be afraid of a "dissolution of the Union," and solve the problem of human destination by offering to sacrifice his own brother, sister, wife, daughter, mother! Will the North consent? Why stop at the thirteenth demand and not at the first, at the ninth? Is it worse
