The Middlebury galaxy. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1848-1850, 1848-09-12
For he Galdry.
Mr.. BARRETT :.

this date, (Sept. eth,) in notice of tn
death of the late A. H. Stephens Of Geor
ria. observed the following sentence
Ill will be recollected that it was Mr.
Stephens who moved to lay the ComPro'
mise bill on the table, and who, with sew
en- other Wings from the South, voted
with the Northern Wings against fh0t
pecnliarl, Southern measure. at the r'sk
of their seats in the House"
It seems Mr.. Clarke is so haunted by
The ghost of this Compromise bill, that he
could not let slip even this occasion to be-
stow his Reproduction upon it. But is MIR.
Clarke acquainted with Mr.. Stephens
views of that bill If not. l believe can
eplighten him a little on the subject. MIR.
S. made altogether the ablest speech on
that subject which was made IN the House.
He adopted precisely the views of the
Senator from Vermont who supported the
BILL sustaining the argument Of that Sen
s.or BY illustration and authority. The
conclusion to which Mr.. S. came is best
expressed IN his own words.
Mr.. Stephens commenced his argument
as follows: 1t is my object to speak al
this time upon that measure, which some
gentlemen are pleased TO call the Com
promise BILL" but which might be more
properly entitled Articles Of capitalization
on the part of the South. So far from
being a compromise, the bill proposed
nothing short of an abandonment Of the
position of the South, and surrender of
the Just right Of her people to an equal
participation in the ncW acquisitions Of
serritory. The surrender Uas cOvert,
but il ,0as no less complete and absolute"
MIR. S proceeds to say: This Compro-
mise bill, Sir, did, in my opinion, endan-
rer and surrender the then rights Of the
South. 6v continuance If the munich
pqL Ealcs 0f McricO, 1CaicA rere Of torce
at the fime of the conquest, and by Uhich
Siarrry ras abolished there. Sir, set
out by stating that should not only chal
lcage, but defy reiutation of my posi-
ton, and l now repeat the same. The
rights af thc South are not only endGn-
gtrcd, bit Totally abandoned in this Com
promise"
Again he SAYS, in conc usion AS |
h.Ys hr, few minutes left, | will reiter>
ate NY positions, that no man may
mistake or misapprehend them" The
' $ that by the bill the whole subject
ofSavery in California and New Mexico
Without any legislation on the part of
Congress or territorial governments, one
war or the other, is referred to the judicia>
~ to determine whether it can legally ex-
Is; there or not"
2dly, That the Constitution of the
United States fully recognizes, and amply
projects the institution Of Slavery lcher'
At erists by The lG,c of the State or place
bit it does nat csta5hsh 1T any ,chere
,ohcn BY the Irp Of the place it is PrOhib-
tied"
" 3dIy, That California and New Mex
leo heing territories acquired by conquest,
all the laws which were in force there at
the time of the conquest. not inconsistent
with the Constitution of the United States.
or The stpulaiions of the Treaty of Peace,
or which were not Of a purely political
character, arc, according to iceH sfttied
principles, and the nJHdicdfiens Of ON
0lcR Courts, StlR IN force.
Ably, That as SlaYcry did not exis
there at the time ofthe conquest, but had
bcen prohibited by cypress lao, the Su'
preme Court of the United States, II
whom the matter was to be referred IL
the last resort, could not be e1perfed IRON
the principles Of numerous decisions al
ready made, TO decide 0therwiSe than thai
slarery can not be prOtected there, unit
Tie cristing lar oboliShing ii be altered By com
re',7f cutaoJay."
18th and lastly, That tbese positions Icing incoa
trors,tlJie, the bill offered as it was, as com
Promise and final settlement of the question, a
noun'edto nothing but total abandonment and sur
rnder of the riqit of extending the institutions Of III
South 10 bos territories"
The editor of the Free Press has here the opin
ion of Mr.. Stephens as expressed by himself
lie can now see how far that distinguished South
ern man regarded the bill as a peculiarly Sou'h
I'm measure" l commend tho whole speech Il
his perusal, as well as those of Mr.. Badger, Mr.
Underwood and others.
Mr.. Badger says We arc 10 submit 10 thu
Supreme Court to determine whether hy viz
tue of anything in the Constitution of thu
United States. the moment these territories be
come ours BY treaty, The Institution Of negro sla
very is established in them. Nor hGre not tn
Tnlot st idea thai the Supreme Court ,rH erer hot
lie afirmatirs Of that question. look upon The bill
calling upon representing nth my colleague III
iaerests Of one of the Southern States to make thu
total surrender in her behalf"
Now if Southern men are applauded for votin,
against this bill for sich reasons, how can Nor
them man, entertaining the same views of tn
BILL be censured for giving it his support? How
much credit Mr. S. is entitled 10 for his vo:eor how
much he risked his seat in the House by it, thu
public can judge. But it is little strange that
while this reasoning. the same which was urge6
BY the Vermont Senator, remains unanswered
many opprUbrious epithets should be bestowed
upon he bill.
The writer of this would feel much indebted Il
the editor Of the Free Press if he would point on
in what particulars this hi is "a Pecla iy SoheT1
measure or how slavery could be ntru duccd in
to New Mexico or California consistently will
the provisions, the true intent nnc meaning, anC
legal effect of that bill If he will do this, he vii
do what has not yet been accomplished He vii
do moreover what was not attempted IN elthe
House of Congress for, if he will look at the al