The North Star (Rochester)/1847/12/03/Henry Clay on slavery

From the Rochester Daily Advertiser.

HENRY CLAY ON SLAVERY.

The oracle of the Whigs has spoken; and "the Presidential question is settled," say his idolaters; at least so said they upon the reception of his Lexington Resolutions, although the telegraphic notice of his speech gave ominous presage that everything was not exactly "according to Gunter;" as we were told, that when he came to the Slavery question, "here the wires did'nt seem to work well;" and we were referred to the speech itself, which would be forthcoming in due time. In the interim, however, the Whig press shout loud hosannas, and attempt to Roarback the people into the notion, that Clay has come out upon Anti-Slavery ground; or is up "neck and neck" with the Wilmot proviso—that is, that he would interdict slavery in any new territory which might be acquired. Such a representation is a swindle and a fraud. Henry Clay totally avoids that issue, and sneaks behind the position of "no more territory," which he and every man knows to be a false issue; and under the circumstances of the case, an absurdity.

But let us hear the "great western." He says, "We disclaim in the most positive manner any desire on our part to acquire any foreign territory whatever for the purpose of introducing slavery into it. I do not know that any citizen of the United States entertains such a wish." This is the wonderful and "positive" disclaimer which has so inflated the Whigs, and has made Henry Clay President of the United States! A disclaimer, to which, upon Mr. Clay's own showing, every man in the South can subscribe. He, in short, endorses and defends the whole south from the charge of desiring territory "for the purpose" of extending Slavery. Yet Mr. Clay knew, and we all know, that these same men, millions of them, would move heaven and earth to prevent the passage of the Wilmot Proviso. They are determined to have territory, and Mr. Clay knew it. They are determined that there shall be no interdiction of slavery therein, and he also knew that. Is it any thing else than a pettifogging quibble, for him to disclaim for them and him, that they want territory "for the purpose" of extending slavery. If it is notorious that the south are determined to fight over the Missouri question again about this new territory, what care we for ten thousand disclaimers from Clay, Calhoun & Co., that slavery is not "the purpose" for which they want the territory. Has Mr. Clay come upon the republican ground of "Free labor upon free soil!" He has never approached the thought in his whole speech. Does he say any thing that looks like favoring a Wilmot Proviso? Let me quote the Wilmot Proviso: "There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any territory hereafter acquired by the United States." Nothing like this appears in the speech, and to pretend that Mr. Clay favors such an idea is a gross fraud upon the people.

Does Mr. Clay profess any change of opinion on Slavery? So far from it, he refers to his past history and publicly expressed opinions, and claims that they have at least the merit of "consistency, uniformity, and long duration." On his own showing, Henry Clay, the author of the Missouri compromise, is "the same old coon." P.