Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1848-09-19
.CTORS.
.a,lsiliJs, "a =

.SA gtsp,,:-- ti,gf :. PENDLETON OF Giles.
tJa 5.l,vte;- s'Nh, u. HAYS OF Gllmer
I I.-,r- a, All w. LANGFlTT Of Brooke.
Nv. CASS' LETTER TO Mr.. NlCHOL
SON.
In compliance with the requests OF seVera
Democrats, made to as some days since, we TAKE
great pleasure in again laying before our feaoei'
the admirable letter OF Gen. Cass 10 Mr.. Nichol
son. We had intended 10 comply with these re-
guests al the time they were mace. bu! were com
PEELED 10 deter il until now. We do not regre
tina, this delay has enabled one OF The Wing pa
pers of this city 10 anticipate US, by publishing
this letter in It's columns. On The contrary, we
return our thanks TO The Times for at las, afford
ing It's readers an opportunity 10 see The lsller
isef and we believe, for the first time, to see the
,ohole leuer, SO that they might correctly form
their own Judgment OF its contents; though we
doub, no, that the Times, in now making the
publication, has relied on The voluminous com
mems, partial and disingenuous as they seemed
10 n, with which il had loaded lis columns Tor
months before, TO deprive the letter OF It's just
ipfuenc by binding It's readers TO its true I'm
port. We must trust 10 The justice and lntelli'
eence of those readers to see through The himsy
veil OF pervsrsion and TO detect the specious so.
phisry, with which, as 1t appears to US, the
Times has labored so hard to conceal and mislily
the otherwise plain and obvious meaning oil the
letter; and we should be perfectly willing to let
i, speak for itself in our columns, but lhs, the
Times not only finds i, necessary 10 accompany
i,s publication with The same sort OF comments,
but unwilling 10 trust il with all The load hereto
fore heaped upon il, continues 10 rei'era,c them
still, as if desperately seeking 10 bury it, il pos
sibe, beneath the rubbish OF iallacies, which The
editors have been 50 constantly and induslriously
rakiug together, that they seem to rely only on
The mass they may be able 10 collect. We will
euuravvr 10 scatter all the dust they have thus so
laboriousy heaped up; and We think it but iair
10 clear letter of it, least il izht deceive The
unreHec ting or help TO blind The uncandd.
Whatever may have been his previously ex>
pressed opinions, it is, we believe, admitted on
all hands, that in this letter, written December
4,h, ls47, and published about the Isl of Janu-
airy, ls45. containing the last and most authen
tic expression Of bis opinion, General Cass un.
squivocally and explicitly declares himself op-
posed to the Hiim't Proriso-nay, more that
he is opposed to the exercise Of any Jurisdiction
by Congress over The subject of slavery, either
in tho States or Territories that because
Congress has not the consttuS onat poper to
exercise any such jurisdiction, either by passing
the Wilmot Proviso, or any other act for gu.
LII coro Iot.,< oc
and slave 10 the States or Territories of this
Union. This, we say, is conceded. II could
not be controv' rted, for it is directly and ex
plieitly expressed Look at the letter, and i
will be seen that General Cass gives the conclu
sion TO which he has arrived on these points, in
the following words
81 am opposed TO the exercise of any juris
diction by Congress over this matter, "becauso
do not see in the Constitution any grant Of the
yequisits poscsrt Congress"
II Congress has no jurisdiction over slavery, it
cannot pass the Uiimot Proriso 10 exclude it
or any act whatever either TO regulate, exclude,
or aHnhlate il; for the Provso, as we'll as every
such act, necessarily involves an exercise of
such jurisdiction. And if it has not got this ju
risdiction, because The Constitution does not
grant it, then its exercise by Congress must be
unconstitutional. But no language can express |
these ideas more clearly or explicti, than does
General Cass'; so much SO, that even partizan
blindness has not failed to perceive, nor partizan
injustice ventured to controvert them. All this,
then, is ad nilted.
l, is said, however, that Gen. Cass gees far
,her, aud 10 denying the general jurisdiction over
slavery 10 Congress, claims ii for The people Of the
and We admi, 'ha, he does so, some
extern, and 10 The fnll extent which his language
will warrant, when he says, II am in favor OF
leaving 10 The people OF any territory which may
be hereafter acquired The right 10 regulate it,
(slavery0 "ior themselves, under he general
principles Of the Constitution" Nou,,il will be
observed that the right and the ,otol< right here
claimed by Gen. Cass for the people of The terri
tories thereafter 10 be acquired, is "Ms yieat to
regulate slavery "for themselves" Ii he had
slo 2ped there and said nothing more about il a
plain man would hardly conclude that "ihs right
10 regulate slasay" thai is to pass laps concern.
ing the relation OF master and slave, meant the
right 10 ezeluds or destroy that relation. The
TWO things seem rather incompatible. To destroy
or exclude slavery, one would think was at leas,
very singular mode OF regulating the relation OF
master and slave. In no sense OF The tern does
"regulats" mean TO Destroy or ezeEae On the con-
trary, 1t implies almost necessarily The very res
verse; for slavery must exist in the territories be-
fore the people there could regulate" ii. Blu, in
this very letter Gen. Cass shows tina, he himself
afhxes different meaning to the two terms
Look at the second paragraph in the letter above
The lines just quoted, four sentences from the end
of H. and the reader will 6nd these words: "For if
The relation Of master and servan, may be rsFu.
lated or annia,iated by its legislation" &C.. Here
in This very letter, Gen. Cas- distinguishes be. |
tween the terms "regulats" and "annihaate, ,, |
which last, in the connection 10 which il is used,
is SYNONYMOUS with "ezxlIde." So that /, is plain
that General Cass uses these terms in different
Sec, ALSO for he sense In which he uses the term
10 regulate" the beginning Of the preceding para
graph In tho letter. P''a