Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1848-08-09
Hark from the T0ombS.

In his letter to Mr. Nicholson, Of Tenn,
which will be found in our paper 10 day,
Gen. Cass, speaking Of the power of Con-
gress, says:
"Il should be limited to the creation OF
proper governments for new countrvs, ac-
quired or settled, and to the necessary pro-
vision for their admission into the Union.
learfng, an the mean time TO THE PEOPLE
1NHABITISG THEM to regulate their inter-
nal concerns IN their oacn acay. They are
just as capable oil dong SO as the Ie'ple
of the Stales-and they can do so ut any
rate, as soon as their political amdepen-
dsnce IS recognised by adnusson into the
Union" "Brietfy, then, am opposed to
the exercise of any jurisdiction by Congress
over this matter, and | am in tnvor OF
leaving to the PEOPLE Of erery terrific
ry which may be hereafter acquired, the
right 10 regulate it for themselves, under
the general principles Of the Constlt"-
kon.''
In reply to this doctrine, Mr.. TooMBs.
Of Georgia, a whig member in the House
Of Representatives. in speech the other
day, as reported in the National In,elliger-
car, said:
"1hat real question isis there my
right any where, without tho consent Of the
slaveholdingI States, to prohibit in New
Mexico and California, or to withhold the
protection Of law in the enjoyment of their
property in slaves from such citizens of the
slaveholding States as may choose to emf
CRATE to those dependencies? A large par
ty in this House, and in the Union, hold
that Congress has the right, Gen. Cass, the
democratic nominee for the Presidency,
holds the opinion that the Mexicans, lndi
and, Negroes and mixed races whom we
have conquered, and who occupy those de-
Tendencies, have it. The slaveholding
States hold that this right exists nowhere
that those conquesls are the common
property Of the States Of this Union, and
that ali are entitled to an effectual legal e.
quality in the enjoyment of this common
property. The mode by which you defeat
our rights is wholly immaterial to US. We
opposed the Wilmot Proviso because it de-
fea,ed cur right by Congressional action;
we oppose Gen Cass's doctrine because
they surrender our principles a1d submit
our rights to our ignorant, imbecie, con-
quered slaves"
This Southern whig goes on further and
says:
ITO lull the popular apprehension at the
South some gentlemen on this floor have
spoken Of it as a judicial question. The Su-
preme Court has ever been an unsafe re.
lance upon political questions. LIS duty is
to decide what law is, and that duty it per-
forms well, and not what it ought to be
Their former adjudicaiions settle these
principles; that if, under our system, the
Constitution of the United States does ex.
tend over our conquests without further
action Of this Government, it does not 9TH
erwise affect the question OF slavery there
except to authorize the owners Of fugitive
slaves who should escape to these terrific
ri.s to recover them under its provisions;
that the constitution, though it recognizes
| and protects slavery, both in the States and
Territories Of the Union, uhen and achere
it Lawfully exists, ESTABLISHES IT
NOW HERE. And, as the necessary re.
suit from these adjudications, slauery be
ing abolished in NeaO Mesico and Cali.
fornia, the Southern stakeholder aoho emf
CRATES to those Territories auith his slares
has no legal guarantees for the protection
Of this property, Let US not deceive our