Thus early was this menace tried. But the treaty was ratified.

The menace was employed with more effect to secure the adoption of the Missouri Compromise. This was in 1820. Missouri applied for admission into the Union as a Slaveholding State. Her admission was opposed by the North on the declared ground that it was not right to give any such sanction to Slavery. Thus the whole Slave Question was opened; and it was discussed with much thoroughness and ability, under the lead of Rufus King, once an eminent representative of Massachusetts, but at that time a venerable Senator from New York. Overthrown in argument, the Slave-Masters resorted to threats of disunion. The Union was pronounced in danger, and under this cry a compromise, first suggested in the House by Louis McLane, a Representative from Delaware, and in the Senate by William Pinkney, a Senator from Maryland, was adopted, by virtue of which Missouri was admitted as a Slave State, while Slavery was prohibited in the remaining territory north of 36° 30´, at that time trodden only by Indians. The special operative gain to the Slave-Masters was the admission of Missouri as a Slave State, with two new slaveholding Senators to confirm their predominance in the Senate; and this was notoriously secured under threats of disunion, by which weak men at the North were intimidated.

Charles Sumner; his complete works, volume 7 (of 20) — Part 16

A record at the time by the late Mr. Justice Story, who was then at Washington, shows the temper especially of Virginia. Writing to a friend at home, he says:--

Charles Sumner; his complete works, volume 7 (of 20) — Part 16

“Mr. Randolph, in the House of Representatives, made a furious attack upon all who advocated the Compromise. He said: ‘The land is _ours_ [meaning Virginia’s], and we will have it, and hold it, and use it as we [Virginians] please.’ He abused all the Eastern States in the most bitter style, and intimated in the most direct manner that he would have nothing to do with them. ‘We,’ said he, ‘will not cut and deal with them, but will put our hands upon our pockets and have nothing to do in this game with them.’ His speech was a very severe philippic, and contained a great many offensive allusions. _It let out the great secrets of Virginia, and blabbed that policy by which she has hitherto bullied us, and led us, and wheedled us, and governed us._ You would not have supposed that there was a State in the Union entitled to any confidence or character, except Virginia.”[19]

Charles Sumner; his complete works, volume 7 (of 20) — Part 16