The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-09-05

States on the coast of California
Why, them these people to be deprived, in viola
ton OF these solemn pledges, OF the right OF segovern-
ment, which they have exercised for quarter OF
fury, and TO be subjected to the despotc government OF
men in whose election they have no voice. Is IT repub
lcan Is IT JUST Will II tend to promote the OF
freedom, will it not rather inevitably result IN esiab
fishing slavery there firmly believe it, and am, there
fore, opposed TO the bill
Theoretically sir concur with my honorable friend
from Vermont Mr.. PHELrs in the views he has ably
presented of the legal principles which have been broug
have influenced him in yielding his and support
the provisions of this bill If, by the existing law slave
ry is prohibited in New Mexico and California and il
that law will remain in force after the passage Of this
bill, unaffected by It's provisions, / have no doubt of
the correctness OF The legal inference that person who
may be vol UNFAIRLY carried there can be lawfully held
a slave. In the language OF Judge Bronson, OF the
supreme court of New York the relation of master and
slave does not exist by the law of nature, nor has the
claim OF the MASTER like the right property in general
been recognised by all civilized communities Slavery
cannot exist when there is positive law to uphold il
1t Is not necessary that IT should be forbidden 1t
enough that ii is not specially authorized If the
OF slaves removes WITH sends them into any country
State, Territory, where slavery does exist by law
they will from that moment become freemen" In the
celebrated case OF "Forbes Cochrane, reported i'm
Barn. and Cress, 463 the Court of Kings Bench say:
rhe right to slaves when tolerated by law is founded
the law of nature but the law of particular
country Il is law in mpitunt and when party gets our
Of the of his and gets under the projection
another power, without any wrongful done by party
oundsd on the municipal law Of the particular place only
does not continue The moment foreign slave puts his
shores. he be a slave because there
no law here which sanctions his being held in slavery
And the local law which held him in slavery against the
law ofnature has lost its force"
The decision of Chief Justice Shaw, liberating on
habeas corpus Lucas slave who had been put by his
master board Of government ship in Virginia, which
touched at Boston in the course of her voyage,
founded on similar principles - Law Reporter.
But, sir, while assent fully to these principles the
honorable senator from Georgia, Mr. BERRIEN,1 and
other gentlemen of great legal acumen, have maintained
pf fharc fiat
the Mexican laws, so far as they prohibit slavery, will
not continue force, but that the constitution of the
United States will accompany the STAKEHOLDER pano
ply for his projections and override and destroy them
confess, sir, should be much better satisfied with the
BILL if it contained as in the case of Louisiana, and Flor
ida, and the District of Columbia and of every other
cesson made TO this government, an express pro-
vision that the existing laws shall remain in force until
they repealed and, better STILL if the judges, by
hbited in direct terms from repeating the law orbidding
slavery in those Territories do not like the guarded
phraseology by which their power of legislation is
respecting establishment of religion, respecting
slavery" it stands. but it is proposed by the
friends OF the bill to be amended, respecting the adms
sion or prohibition of slavery"
Now. as Congress have no power by the constitution
of the United States TO pass any law respecting
hend from the similarity of expression used in regard to
the inhibition OF Legislation respecting slavery that it
will be urged hereafter recognition of the claim that
the same want OF power IN Congress exists the
case as in the other?
AS the bill contains no express provision for the con-
tnnance in force of the existing laws if they do in fact
continue, il will be not by their inherent force
but by the implied assent of the government which has
succeeded to The dominion "Qut prOhzbet, pro
hibere poss, ja6et" But i that government has in any
indicated its WILL that particular laws shall
CONTINUES the implication ceases and they will no longer
have force. The Mexican government had religious
establishment. The constitution declares that Congress
shall make no law respecting establishment of rell-
gon Congress, in communicating legislative powers to
the territorial Judges imposes the restraint them.
They would consequently have power to assent to
the continuance of the Mexican lawIon that subject,
that would be equivalent to its reenactment The
Mexican religious establishment must therefore,
Now, when, in the connection, the power of legis
ating respecting slavery" is also withheld may
be plauslby, not strongly argued, that the Mexican
laws that subject also, will cease. because assent
to their continuance can any longer be implied
should be glad to hear such construction dsclaimed
by all the members OF the committee; the more So
the argument is certainly somewhat countenanced by the
OF Permot the First Municipality of New Or
leans, in the 3D. OF Towards Rep 60 The
exists for the implied continuance OF the fundamen
tai and other territorial laws after the formation OF
as IN the case OF a cesson from one sovereignty to
another Yet, in the referred to, it decided by
1857, 'that person demeaning himself peaceable
manner shall ever be molested account of his mode
OF worship religious sentiments in the said territory,
which operative in Louisiana during the territorial
government chad further force after the adoption of
the State constitution, than other acts organizing part
the territorial government of Orleans, and standing in
Judge Caton, delivering the opinion of the court "as
they conferred political rights and secured civil and
lgiOus liberties, (Which political righs,) the laws of
Congress were all superseded by the State constitution
there any part of them in force, unless they
adopted by the constitution OF Louisiana as the laws of
the State"
If were not intended by coupling these prohibitions
together, to give to that respecting slavery" the
strucon suggested, why may be asked the other
resrlcton respecting establishment OF reglon, in.
serted in the bill Why not directly repeal all laws OF
that character existing Or the extension oil the
constitution the territories would of itself repeal them
and prevent their re-enactment why insert prohibition
may tend to give to the other RESTRICTION the construction
which will be claimed 1t is to be regretted that the
committee have not been able TO furnish to the Senate
more specific information in regard to the existing laws
in New Mexico and California the subject OF slavery
and whether or not any changes have been made at.
tempted in those laws under the governments organized
by the direction OF the President since the conquest and
But whatever may be said OF the Mexican laws in re-
laon to slavery, and however true in theory may be,
that slavery cannot exist where there positive law
to establish and protect it, should this bill be adopted
there would be practical mode of preventing its intro
ducton. The result would, in my opinion, inevitably
bewhat indeed, the chairman of the committee OF com
promise Mr.. CLAYToNl frankly stated in has speech on
reporting the bill TO the Senate
That in Congress should refuse to touch the sub
ject it Qhe territory would lie slavehodng where py me
laws of nature, sape labor only sip ana Jree lao"
could NOT maintain ifsct." -. XII
For my part sir, know of no territory, and should be
unwilling to admit that any exists the face of the
earth fiji 10 be inhabited by man, where he must be
duced to the condition of slave, TO render his labor ef
fective do doubt however that there are regions
of large extent in New Mexico and California, if not in
Oregon also where slavery will certainly be introduced,