The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-03-25

common of both north and SOUTH should be open
TO the enjoyment of the north alone Was there not real
neutrality in what is contended for by the SOUTH that the
territory by the Joint exertons of all should be lett
open TO all under the guarantees and compromises OF the
constitution.
says to the south, THUS far shalt thou go, and no
farther 1t substantially says 10 the south, that her
citizens shall not into any portion OF the territory
their blood their may assist in acquiring bu
they must remain within their present limits or, if they
go there they must not take with them property gnaran-
tied to them by the constitution Yes, @ property guar
constitution trust, sir, shall not shock the OF
any sensitive gentleman in applying the word property 70
slaves In l7s3 the British government (howeyer DIFF
ferenty they might talk now expressly recognised Slaves
Great Britain and the United States signed b. D. Hartley
Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay. on the part Of the
United States Gall northern men, will be found this Ian
gnage: His Britannia Majesty shall, with all conye
carrying quay any negroes other property of the Amer
lean Inhabitants withdraw all his armies, gasons and
fleets from the said United States This treaty recos
ernme and voted for by every northern represent
Mr. Foster, Of New Hampshire Niessrs Gerry, Partridge
ell, of Rhode Island; Messrs Sherman and Wads-
WORTH of Connecticut Mr. Beatty of New Jersey; and
Messrs., Miffin, Hand and Morris. of Pennsylvania
Here, then, have John Jay designating slaves as
property whose character and sentiments referred
to with so much appreciation and complacency by the
gentleman from Massachusetts,, mir WINrHRopl upon
another question, (the war of 1922 and Mr. Morris, OF
Pennsylvania, whose opinions, expressed in the federal
convention, formed text for the gentleman from New
York, [Mr. RATHBUS,l from which he yesterday lee
tured northern representatives who dared TO do their
duty.
II had been well said by the able and distinguished
chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Mr. C.
not American sentiment" II is erotic, and if il
flourish in the soil TO which it has been transplant
ed its influence will be disastrous that of the deadly
upas II not even British sentiment, as | have
shown, in 1883 In the convention which framed our
constitution, the north looked upon slaves entirely
possessing the character OF property that they were for
respect in the light of persons in fixing the basis of
gressiona representation until, at last the difficulty
settled by the three fths basis, it stoodgiving
slaves the mixed character of persons and property This
sentiment had arisen since the early and better days Of
republic and was looked to the last resort of the
advocates Of monarchy to overthrow the nobest govern
lutonary and the war OF 1872 'the might that sum-
bers in eemans ARM" and unless this last effort OF
foreign abolitionism did the work which British steel
here, Mr. Chairman, permit me to read extract clipped
from respectable newspaper showing very clearly the
foreign origin OF this mischievous movement:
"OBJEcTs ABoLrroNIsTs-Hepry C. Wright a leading
abotions from Boston has recene written letter dated
at London, which has been published in the National An
tiSavery Standard in which he says
"' Last Sunday we all spent with William Aslhurst at
his lovely seat Murwe Hill. Mr.. Fox, the anc o1-law
orator. and James Haugton, were with us. The dissolution
tight the B, people to rom ss thus object and a0s the aas s
Of al friends Of freedom to organise league against are
ton "
And So sir, the right Of the British people to effect
dissolution Of the american Union boly asserted By
american aboinion,st, and coacrred By his Brit
ash cOntederates! Who read such language without
feeling the blush of shame mantng his cheek that
America should have ever given birth to such bastard
and tratorous son?
1t not my intention to discuss the question of slavery
in the abstract If wrong be, it is enough for to
know that the people of the south are in no way answer
able for that wrong. They found il existing amongs,
them without any agency their part and if they were
disposed to abolish it. could not be done except the
lapse OF time, without consequences of the most awful
character. That it was introduced into the American
colonies by the agency of the British government and
even against the of those colonies hsto
ry will bear her testimony Those very foreigners who
met and cabaed the seeds of political DISCO
luton and ultimate ruin in this republic, the of
those who entaed slavery upon the colonies And the
place where these foreign nCendares receive the great
est support the city Of Boston, q by intend to
implcae anything like majority of her cZens) fur
nshed the first individual, James Smith, Boston mer
chant, who in 1915 imported slaves into the American
colonies | make this assertion on the authority of
George Bancroft, Massachusetts, historian.
The advocates OF the proposed amendment if under.
right to pass 4, art 4, of the constitution of the
United States, which follows 'The Congress shall
have power TO dispose of and make all needfl rules and
regulations respecting the territory and other property
belonging to the United States" And here, let me re-
mark, how cautiously this grant of power is made
and how atitudinaran must be the construction that
would warrant, under such grant, the adoption of
this amendment! The constitution, in granting to
Congress power over the District of Columbia and
places purchased from the States for the erection of
FORTS magazines, arsenals, and dock yards, - uses
the language, that Congress shall have power to
exclusive Legislation all tehatsoeuer over
such district and such Places whereas in regard to the
territory Of the United States they only authorized to
make all needful rules and regulations" Mark the
strong distinction in the grants of power In the first
grant, how full and comprehensive! In the second, how
limited and restricted In the case, it is exclusive
Legislature porer in the other, right dispose
of and to make needu rules and regulations; evidently
abiding to such rules and regulations may be
sary to carry into effect the power granted of dsposng OF
said territory. Let look further into the terms of this
grant of power. Congress has power TO make all need
tW rules and regulations Will it be said that the fra
of the constitution could have intended that such
a "needfA ruler Could men representing slave States
in that conven) Qor New York then had 900 slaves
and New Jersey 1900, and indeed every State but
had then slaves within It's limits) have imagined that
that such rule as this Is rule ''needul' in its
character' The supposlton cannot be maintained But
TO the United States" Does this territory upon which
propose TO plant this restriction belong to the
United States What says the amendments 1t express
ly applies to terory which shall hereafter be acquired
By or annexed to the United States" Again, ii is only
in regard 10 territory other property belonging 10 the
United States that authorized to make ''needful
rules and regulations y and yet under this grant are
asked 10 make rules and regulations regard to property
not belonging TO the United States but 'rie belongs 10
indtutdtdiS. You asked 10 say, that if slave goes
egslatng in regard to property belonging TO indtridai
and not to the United States Such is the sandy ounda-
ton upon which the advocates of this restriction have
built