Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1848-08-31

men, but court of Justice might adludge,
that as between the subjects and the govern
ment, the acts of the latter had no validity
whatever, and therefore, though treaty
made by us with the government actually in
power might be binding it by no means fol-
lowed that our courts would sustain laws,
in derogation of the rights of property, en-
acted by any of the series of usurpations
with which Mexico had been cursed.
Doubtless il was true that the law had
been generally acquiesced in, at least in the
states that it had been so universally, in
the territories, was not yet proved, out there
was every reason to believe, that slavery ex-
listed in fact, to but very limited extent, if
at ALL in any part of the Mexican republic.
What the effect of such acquiescence in a
law not perhaps originally binding might be,
Mr.. Marsh would not undertake to say, but
he was unwilling to risk anything on such a
question.
In regard to Oregon, Mr.. NJ. said, that
persons familiar with the discussions relative
to our rights to that territory would remem-
Der, that upon full debate, and especially
after the able speech Of a distinguished
Senator from New York, (Mr DIX it was
generally agreed, that the title by which we
must stand or fall was that derived from
Spain by the treaty Of 1919. In Oregon,
then considered as part of Spanish Amer
lea, Slavery legally existed, at the time of
the transfer to the United States. 1t would
not be admitted by Southern gentlemen,
that Slavery was abolished by the change of
sovereignty On the contrary, they insisted
that the range of Slavery was erteRdcd, by
Il. {. 4 -
fore free, in virtue of the alledged right of
every American citizen to migrate thither,
carrying with him his movable property,
and personal rights to property. Slavery,
then, said Mr. NJ, it will be contended,
may now be legally introduced into Oregon,
unless prohibited by law. 1t was urged
that the provisional government organized
by the people of Oregon had adopted the
great feature of the ordinance of 1897, but
when, in what form, and under what sane
tionsl On this subject we are by no means
fully enlightened, and Mr. NJ. had the au-
thority of gentleman, who had twice visi-
ted Oregon, and resided there for many
months, for saying that, in spite or the or
dnance of the provisional government, both
Africans and Sandwich Islanders are at this
hour, to some extent, held in Slavery in that
territory.
might, therefore, and would be, conteu-
died. said Mr. NJ, that Slavery might be
lawfully re-introduced throughout the whole
of those vast districts where it had altogeth.
err, or with trihing exceptions, ceased to ex.
list, upon two grounds: First, that Slavery
having been permitted in Oregon, Califor-
MIA, and New Mexico, while provinces Of
Spain, and having never been legally abol.
ished, in contemplation of law still exists in
those territories and secondly, that though
Slavery may haze been abolished by Mexi
CO, yet American Shareholders may now
revive it, by removing to the territories anc
carrying their Slaves with them.
To the latter of these propositions Mr.
NJ. said he could by no means assent, though
aware that much better lawyers than him
self had maintained the affirmative, and a:
to the former, while he was not prepared t.
deny what he hoped would prove true, tina
Slavery, namely, had been legally abolished
throughout both the States and the Terri
tories of Mexico, yet he must insist that W,
were acting without any sufficient warrant
in assuming such to be the fact
Mr.. Marsh continued as follows 1t is
then, matter Of grave doubt, whether TIT
effect of the acquisition of New Mexico
California, and Oregon is not the extension
of Christian American Slavery through al
those wide provinces. How shall this doub
be solved? Two modes are proposed. Thu
one is to cut this gordian knot by the swor,
of Congressional legislation, the other is T.
refer the question, as matter Of law, t
the determination of judicial tribunals
The first method proposes The abolition c
: Slavery, if actually, or in contemplation G
law, now existent in these territories, an
its prohibition, if now non-existent tn
other repudiates the interference Of Con
gress, and avows the purpose of toleratin
: Slavery wherever 1t now exists, or can
introduced without violation of positiv
2 prohibitory law. The advocates of the fol
. mer plan seek to restrict Slavery, by adop
ing the principles of the ordinance of 1857
: the action of those of the latter, tends t
spread it through the operation of the Con
: promise Bill lately reported to the Senate
: the United States, over immense region
: where it now exists, if indeed at all, only {
o legal fiction.
+ shall first say word in reference to III
!, expedlency and the safety of submitting tn
a great question to adjudication by courts
G law. | may safely assume, that no INTEL
n gent lawyer, certainly no Northern lawye
i would be content to leave this point to
n determined, in the last resort, by the loo
:, tribunals; yet the bill pressed by some
e its friends with hot and indecent haste,
E order that it might be acted upon befol
d public sentiment should be roused and ii
e public will expressed-a bill framed, too, /
y lawyers presumably not ignorant of the vel
e recent decision of the Supreme Court of Il
United States in Barry's case--containe
l. as originally reported, no effectual provisiC
y for the removal of the question to the S
t., preme Court. 1t is true, that an amen
t, ment for that purpose was finally adopte
al but the negative votes Of some, and the
S, lence of other friends of the bill, upon II
e. and other amendments designed to 81
'h freedom an equal chance with slavery, in,
IN cate plainly enough, that its trainers had n
IN specially at heart the promotion of the eau
10 OF human liberty by the legislative or jul
d. cial action Of this republic.'
Mt .Ipon the day u tho passage of the oupromse Bill
80 me senate' mo following amendments among others