The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1848-08-30
SPEECH OF JOS. A. WOODARD,

SPEECH OF JOS. A. NOODARD,
OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
In the House Of Representatives, July3 ls4s.
y CONCLUDED.
! must he understood as saying that IN
cnac,ing territorial governments Congress
has not in any particular provision violated
the rights of the several States, or the peo
pie thereof know that Congress has done
this. The power of Congress over its ter
r,ories canno, he exertcd IN manner to
affect nluriousiy The rights OF third parties;
,ha, is the several states or the people thereof.
Congress could not do this, and of course no
subordinate authority could do it. And ac-
cordingly this having been dune IN the ordl.
nance of 1857, at the very first session OF
= Congress under the new constitution, Mr..
Madison being prcsep. IN his seat, a charter
of covernment for the territory south ot The
OHIO river was enacted, and clause mscr-
ted disabling the territorial legislature 10
pass any law excluding citizens who should
immiprate with their slaves. And The law ]
believe passed sub Silentio. No controver,
sv grew out of the proposition. 1t was the
mode of executing the first compromise be-
tween slave and free Stales--a compromise
acqniesed in by authority, competent to DO
50. And if this mode be now abandoned,
then arc the slave States deprived of the
poor privileges left them by the Missouri
compromise, and the principle of the VIII
mo, proviso becomes predominant south OF
36 deg. 80 m,n. as it is north of The samc
line. by force nf that compromise. lie thcr:-
fore, who is opposed To Congress perform
ING the solemn duty to the South OF nnpns-
ing such prohibition upon the territorial &C.
gislature; is proviso man, practically, 1t not
at heart. And The deceptive and dcluSve
maxim f.'non-ntervcntion' will not long
disguise its sophislry from the southern pco-
PIE.
BIT it is con,ended-you will pardon me,
sir, if | say pretcndcd-that, in passing any
law in relation to slavery, Congress would
be assuming jurisdiction over the question:
Indeed! Sir, do we assume jurisdiction! 1t
Congress have not jurisdiction, ought ii not
to say so7 And more especially. IN lnslItu-
ting territorial government, which is to
take charge of the constitutional rights oil
citizen, ought not Congress to disable that
legislature from doing what The Constitution
has disabled Congress from doing7 A word
or two more on this subject presently. ]
will proceed 10 show what it is Congress
can do and cannot do in this particular.
Nobody wanted to be informed that Con-
gress has no jurisdiction Of the question
0fsIavery. But gentlemen seem to be in
perfec, mist as to the true meaning nt this
propositicn 1t means that Congress can not
make the existence Of slavery questionable
point, and assume jurisdiction to decide that
question afirnatvely or negatively. The
only issue involved in the question OF slavery,
is. ..to be or not to be-" and the only dccIs-
ion that could be made upon that issue.
would be, yea or nav-sIavcry shall exist,
or shall not exist. Clearly Congress has no
such jurisdiction. But, sir. il is great mis-
take to suppose that there is any difference
in this respeci, between slaves and any
other form of property. Neither can Com
gress assume jurisdiction OF the question ot
the general institution of property. Ii can
not make that institution questionable
point, and assume TO decide the question.
II cannot abrogate property, and subs itute
communism; much less wrest his property
ont of the hands Of the citizen and throw II
away. Nor can it assume jurisdiction of
the question of any particular species OF
property; it cannot orua'" !'a' ca'''c, or
houses, or land, shall not be property; these
matters are aboye the authority OF all Iegls'
jatures. Federal or local. But do gentle
men understand by this that Congress can.
not, within it leg gi,imate sphere, enact con-
servative laws in relation TO the SUBSTANCE
passing BY the question Of property! Is 1t
not its solemn duty. wherever it has Jurls.
diction, to make all laws necessary to pro-
1ect the rights Of the citizen in his property
of every kind, without any exception! II
it can legisla,e for this District, is it not
bound TO take care of the rights Of proper
ty here-negro property. as well us other
kinds! And shall it be permitted to exone-
rate itself of this solemn obligation, under
the sophistrical pretext that it has no lurls
diction over the question of slavery! SIR
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. G'dd'ngs
will 90 with you for this sort OF "non-'nier
veption," both in this District and Territories
Congress may PASS laws taxing negro pro
perty in a State; it might enact law ina
slave should not be employed TO drive
stage coach conveying the United State
Mail. But this kind OF jurisdiction confer
no right to say that negroes shall not bt
nroperty-it assumes that they are property
Con,Iemen appear TO forget the fundamen