FORMATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.     163
for a certain number of years, and prohibited
forever after. He showed his usual straight-
forward willingness to call things by their right
names in desiring to see " slavery " named
outright in the Constitution, instead of being
characterized with cowardly circumlocution, as
was actually done.
In finally yielding and assenting to a com-
promise, he was perfectly right. The crazy
talk about the iniquity of consenting to any
recognition of slavery whatever in the Con-
stitution is quite beside the mark; and it is
equally irrelevant to assert that the so-called
"compromises" were not properly compromises
at all, because there were no mutual conces-
sions, and the Southern States had " no shadow
of right " to what they demanded and only in
part gave up. It was all-important that there
should be a Union, but it had to result from
the voluntary action of all the states ; and each
state had a perfect " right " to demand just
whatever it chose. The really wise and high-
minded statesmen demanded for themselves
nothing save justice; but they had to accom-
plish their purpose by yielding somewhat to the
prejudices of their more foolish and less disin-
terested colleagues. It was better to limit the
duration of the slave trade to twenty years than
to allow it to be continued indefinitely, as would