The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-03-31


and judicial. The and treaty making powers are
ample oi tins purpose and under them, tins territory
will be acquired constituonally When acquired, If
necessarily falls under the provisions of the constitutions
and IS subjected to its operation eectually as II II had
been originally part of the Union The practice of the
goyernmtt IN the case of Louisiana and Florida, proves
this, WI any one pretend that the members OF the con-
vention, x ne time ii framing Ire constitution, dreamed
OF State being admitted INTO the Uniok which did not,
al that PERIOD constitute part OF our territorial limits
end YET re same men who now oppose Tins measure e
the gsol mat the provisions OF the constitution VIII
not apply 70 tho territory to be acquired, argued that
Texas could be properly sdmed under the proTsion OF
the constitution authorizing new States to be admitted
Madison discusses briefly the proprety OF this paragraph,
and shows be grounds upon which it rs based e then
kes up the other paragraph of the same section, beng
the one tn which we rely Tor our power to establish ter
rtoria governments, pnd says, this is power OF very
great importance, and Ieqclred by considerations similar
to those which show the popfey Of the former" Now
here il 4 section of Ore constitution, embracing two para
graphs only: the one relating to the admission Jf new
States into the Union, the other to the disposition OF the
territory OF the United States and here IS Mr. Madisons
remarks to the people of the Union in regard to them
can there be doubt OF the relation OF the one TO the
otherF The gave to Congress the power OF govern
ing il until prepared to enter the Union, and the ncpieDt
stems were taken for its admission; the other conferred
tbe uotsor 10 admit the State throwing off its territorial
character, into the Union. The proceedings OF the
ven,on relative these two clauses, also show that this
was the design.
Gentlemen INQUIRE what authority We have to exclude
their property from this territory The answer ~ sasy
given, do not attemptit. Slaves IN contemplation On
the constitution, not property. but persons me au
thorty for excluding aliens and Tree Dlaeks aPpes DIS
well to slaves But the policy and propety OF me ea
cuson is very different in the three cases we nave
the power of prohibiting any persons not QUEENS rom
emigating and setting there. That slaves are not prop
erty merchandise may be considered as July setueu
In the case Of Groves ct al Us. Slaughter 90 felers
Reports) Mr. Walker (now Secretary OF the lreasury,)
in very elaborate argument before the Supreme court,
shows this most eonclusivey Speaking OF the consll
u'ona power OF Congress to regulate commerce between
the States he says Ihe to be regulated was
that universal commerce in articles OF merchandise re-
gaed as such in all the States, and throughout the ma
tom and which existed in every state, ana WINCH eon
merce to be created abolished by State Jaws
but was subject between all the States TO te suP,e me
exclusive, and uniform regulation OF Congress- II I'VE wa
commerce IN merchandise and regarded as such os an ae
States ard not commerce in persons, that was mus ue
signed to be regulated by Congress" Nv rs .he
abolitonists who must wholly deprive the slaves OF tI
character of persons and reduce them r all respects to
the level of merchandise, before they can apply to them
the power of Congress- to regulate commerce among the
States" The master has no right to the nesh
and blood the bones and slnews OF any man, under the
laws of the south And the right is 10 the services
of the slave" (See Joness case, Walkers Miss he
ports, S3) In the of Grover and Slaughter,
Judge Mclean took the view OF the question: and
Mr. Madison, in the fifty third number OF the Fedeallst
says "he federal constitution decides with great pro-
Ipriety the OF slaves, when 1t views the III
the mixed character of persons and property" AND
again LET the of the slaves be considered as It
in truth peculiar Let the compromising eXpedient
OF the COnsutuuOn De 1nuludlly auopeu WiSh
them inhabitants but debased by servitude below
the equal level of free inhabitants 1t is pain then,
that the exclusion prohibition does not conflict with
the constitutional power of southern men to take thelr
property or merchandise into the territory. @
In the courts in several of the sIaveholdng states, II
has been decided that if the master took has slave INTO
non-savehoding State with the intention OF residing
there and afterwards carried him back to the slave State
the slave had right 10 his liberty that the moment his
foot touched free soil his bonds were oosed and MS ser
vtude ended strong case under the ordinance OF s7
was decided in the court of appeals in Kentucky, Qts
highest judicial bunal) where after most elaborate ana
learned arguments this doctrine was sustained by inc
whole court The particular question involved In the
case was, whether slave taken from Kentucky into In
diana and there by the laws the State held Tor several
years servtude and then taken back to Kentucky was
any longer a slave, or entitled to her freedom. Inc
Judges say that 'savery sanctioned by the laws oil this
State and the right to hold them under our municipal
uations is unquesonable. But we view this as right
existing by positive law of amunicpa character without
foundation in the law OF nature, or the unwrltten or
common law If by their positive provisions in our code,
we can and must hold our slaves in the one case and
statutory provisions equally positive decide against that
right in the other and berae the slave, he must. by dr
authority equally mperous, be declared free Every ar
gument which supports the right on the one sde based
upon the force of written law, must be equally conclu-
sive in favor of the slave when he point out IN the
statute the clause which his freedom" Again sis
there less comfy existing between State and State, or
State and Territory, than exists between the despoc
governments of Europe Among them, it is believed
that precedent cannot be furnished OF an alien frend
the subject of foreign power who was free in his own
land beng DENIED the right OIL qudleu lTeeuon Wnei
he sojourned abroad The constitution of the United
States secures this principle between State and the clt-
zens of the several States and it does exist in regard to
the inhabitants OF territories although they may not fall
within the letter of the federal constitution" (See Ran
kin VS. Lydia, 2 MarshalPs Reports, 467)
2 Then how could slaves be retained in bondage IN
territory acknowledged be free, unless by force or
through some special enacments of Congress- by the
constitution of Mexico slavery prohibited IN her terri
tories and any of her country is surrendered to the
United States il must retain its free character according
all principles of national law, until changed by the act
of our government But the gentleman from FLORIDA,
. MIR BRocKENBRoUGH,l who has just preceded me, has
warned us that they will, when necessary, overrun
they had done Texas and establish slavery there
Now, sir does not this foreshadow what Will come 10
pass unless the initiative steps are taken to prevent II!
Could there be stronger argument to show the necessity
of our declaring firm and Interchangeable determination
not amely submit to the introduction OF slavery INTO
:, any territory that may be acquired
An effort will be made to substitute Tor the provso lne
Missouri compromise line which would in effect exclude
the free States from all participation any territory thai
may be acquired south of SO degrees 30 minutes norm
latitude This compromise applied solely 10 the onisa
ma territory and by acquescence on the part OF noher'
men to Florida but never was contemplated as eNeu
G ing beyond this No member OF Congress- who voteC
for it, presumed that it was affect future acquisitions
territory BY the north that compromise has been lena
; ciousy adhered to- Though the arrangement was disad
vanageous to us yet it scrupuously observed ot
our southern friends not satisfied with the advantage
= gained Let northern agree 10 the establishment
n fbe Missouri compromise line and who foresee the
number of slave States that will hereafter be added 10 th
Union As the slave population increases expansion
4 the territorial bounds will be demanded and obtained L
we proceed annex the we have for the last three
years. by admission OF States, by treaty. ana by cohque'
The day is not very far distant when all Mexico VIII d.
i absorbed in the Union: and then where will the powe
VI and control of the government be- These are not mere
creatures of the imagination Many sensible southern mel