POLITICAL COMPROMISES.

These have usually been made from more than one motive:

1. One strong plea is that the expediency is so urgent that a small
sacrifice of right is justifiable. In that celebrated law case of
Shylock the Jew _versus_ Antonio the merchant, so ably reported by
William Shakespeare, Esq., this reason was plainly stated. The
defendant's attorney, Bassanio, in order to avert from his client the
dreadful forfeit of a pound of flesh taken nearest his heart, appealed
to the judge:

"I beseech you
Wrest once the law to your authority;
To do a great right, do a little wrong."

The "wise young judge" knew the law, human and divine, too well to grant
this plea.

But that plea had its influence in securing the adoption of the Federal
Constitution. Among other difficulties in the way, a constructive
guarantee of slavery seemed necessary to secure the assent of some of
the Southern States. How strong the plea! Slavery was wrong to be sure,
but the terrible seven years' war was ended, and a great nation was
ready to come into existence! The compromise was made and the Union was
formed. But did the compromise save it? No! The "pound of flesh" was at
last the price. After a struggle of seventy-two years the crisis came,
Sumter was fired upon and the compromise was found to be a failure. "A
pound of flesh!" Nay, the flesh and blood of a million of men saved the