The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-09-30


hostages.
Laws have been passed from time time regulating the
condition of slavery recognised condition OF part of the
population, but for other end. And by the policy OF
such legislation slaves have been treated
estate, and at another personal.
The condition Of slavery then, is nothing than the
right of the to the OF the bondmen during the
life Of the latter and which the jus dpoend attached
as to any other species of properythe right which
the master law has TO the service of the servant
or the master TO the apprentice the only difference being
far the quality of property concerned that the
temporary and the other during life Whence them does
the honorable senator from Vermont derive his opinion that
slave Is not property!
But the deduction drawn by that honorable senator is
equally untenabe. Proceeding upon the assumption that
that can exist only where such domestic relation
cognsed by law, and that consequence, when slave
taken to State where there such relation he becomes
free. Sir, think have established as legal pronosition
the opposite When the condition of the subject is that
OF bondage, whether be temporary perpetual it is
cognsed by law, and enforced legal right And f it
be the of slave such slave becomes free when taken
to country State, only where such servtude forbid
den or prohibited by express local law. 1t follows then
that while no special law required to create this species
bondage does require positive special law to destroy
and such laws have been passed all the States where
slavery has been prohibited.
Mr. Wakes, Will the honorable senator allow me to
ask him question: ~
Mr.. MASON. Certainly.
Mr. WALKER Does the senator to say that
slavery the natural condition of man. and that manu-
mission is mere step in the progress of artificial cond
tion'
Mr. MASON am unaware that the senator from Wiscon-
SIN can draw that deduction from anything said by
Mr. WALKER. My deduction may not be the same that
the Senator himself would draw. merely ask in order
get an explanation of the honorable senator's views
Mr. MASON. The proposition assert is this, that the
African population brought to the shores of North America
in bondage and sold the inhabitants bondmen brought
law recognised 1T here That all What the natural con-
don of these people in Africa may have been the
may determine for HIMSELF but where condition of bond
age fixed that condition recognised by law un
il sal hat in
Africa this relic of barbarism which places the captive
the absolute disposal of the capor remains and the larger
portion OF slaves sent this country before the pro-
hbon of the trade those taken battle seized by
the strong of power. The proposition is that
let their condition result from what might they brought
with them from Africa. 1t given them, fixed upon
them there, and all that done in this country
recognise it. There law n Virginia creating
slavery and doubt if there has been such law in any
OF the southern States. There necessity for such
law.
Suffer me now, sir, to sum up the argument have ad
vanced This institution existed when the constitution
formed. 1t recognised, it legislated upon,
made the subject of concession side and equivalent
on the other There was assigned to it representative
weight an element of political power in the southern
States 1t guaranteed those States by the constit
ton and be tolerated that power Congress
lessate for the territories power deduced from
sty only and temporary in its exercise, o when
the territory becomes shoud be wrested from its
legitimate ends, and made the balances of the
constitution and to destroy its guarantees To give such
direction would be outrage of all just legal constructions
and of every of political right the States interested
The from New York has said tina, there is line
of unbroken precedens from the first for
res under the constitution down to this day, establishing
the right In Congress which contended for by him.
Sir have examined with the laws which he has adj
vanced precedents and utterly deny that they touch the
right in question, in the single instance of the act of
1890 for the admission into the Union of the State of Mis-
souri, known as an exception, 10y the name of the Mis-
The first law cited by the precedent is the
of August 1888, entitled An act to provide for the gov
eminent of the territory northwest Of the Ohio river"
10 net NOR Than Va avIclnp far
adapting the Obligations &c. OF the ordinance of 1887 to
the present constitution Of the United Sates in order that
may continue to have full effect" It necessary
do this in order continue in force within that Territory
the compact contained in that ordinance, made by the
continental Congress- and the act passed in obedience
the sixth article Of the constitution, which is in these
words:
debts contracted and engagements entered into before
the adoption of this constitution shall be valid against the
ration"
The ordinance of 1857 Of these engagements
and the of 1889 did nothing than to continue il in
force under the government of the United States.
have already spoken at large respect to this ordinance
of 1857. II made and ordained law governing the
north Territory before the present constitution was
formed sanction derived from the Congress of the
Confederation" and that sanction recognised by the
sixth article of the constitution, and thus became mandate
to the government When Congress, them in 1889,
and subsequently, egislaed for the government of the terri
tories any of hem to the northwest of the Ohio river
egsated in subordnation the ordinance of 1885, and
follows that ordinance prohibited slavery, such prohbi
ton paramount to the authority of Congress The
States Of Ohio, Indiana Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin
carved Of this northwestern Territory, and pre-
cedent of constitutional power affecting the question of
slavery be drawn from any act of Congress for the
ganzaon government of the territories out of which
either of these States was formed
The act of March, 1904, erecting the Territorial govern
of louisiana and Orleans cited by the
from New York. is true that this act regulated the
admission of slaves those territories, but expressly
authorized what the south contends for, the I'M
poraton Of slaves by citizen of the United States
moving into said Territory for actual settlement, and being
the of such removal bona de owner of such slaves
The prohibitions only the importation of savcs from
beyond the limits of the United S'aesin other words,
prohibition of the foreign slave trade, and of slaves which
had been imported into the United States the LIST of
May 1898. The of this last restriction have
been able trace but have been told that referable
treaty spulaons between France and SPAIN from
which latter the province had been derived
The laws for the government of the Territory of Mssis
spp, which coded by South Carolina of Alabama
which coded part by South Carolina and in part
Georgia and of Arkansas, which part OF louisiana
removing INTO those Territories for settlement with their
slaves.
In the instrnce of Iowa, which erected into sepa
Territory by act of June, 1885, the law scrupuousy
efraned from this prohibition of slavery, although was
formed of territory subject the restriction of the Missouri
compromise ACT being part Of the Missouri territory,
lying north of the parallel Of 36' 3d. BY the act OF April
90 1885, establishing territorial government Tor Wiscon
sn-whch part Of the Northwestern Territory, and
declared ented all the rights, privileges and advan
ges granted and secured by the ordinance OF l7o and
subject to all the conditions, restrictions, and prohibitions
in said articles imposed Whereas by the for the gov
eminent of Iowa. the "rghs, privileges, and immunics
granted and secured to the inhabitants of Wisconsin"