Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1848-09-08

President, a man VINO was on Wo sCo"N
action when the Constitution was Iormeu'
srbncurriBe 10 that opinion, approved the n"l'
T'br documents which attest these Interest,"
i.r circumstances are before the country,
ami avery one will Judge for himself Of their
claims TO credence, considered in connection
with what has been said upon the subject by
the survivor of the cabinet referred to.
TO bring the matter nearer to our own
times, within a few days, upon the very heel
of the recent discussions upon this point, a
bill containing this pstriction-the very bill
which has in part produced this discussion
has passed both branches Of the national
legislature, and received the constitutional
approval OF the present executive-an ap.
prevail which it was his sworn duty to with
hold, if he had not heen satisfied that all the
provisions Of the bill were in conformity to
the constitution. The present President, al
so a stakeholder, elected from a slaveholding
state, with a large portion ofhis Cabinet in
the same situation, has given the highest
sanction to the doctrine we contend for that
is known to our institutions; and although
he felt himself called upon to make an extra
message, setting forth his reasons for be-
ilevlng that the restriction ought not 10 be
applied to our Mexican territories, he does
NV IN AAt CliAtltrl hHNl' q VI AAt i''N
tional objection on which so many southern
states had based their opposition to the gem
eral measure. This branch of the subject
ha. been thus, and we hope forever, disposed
of.
1t is further coutended that slaves are so
far to be regarded as property as to author
ize their owners to carry them into any of
the territories, and to hold them there, not
withstandinp any act which Congress may
pass upon the subject. ii congress have the
constitutional power to prohibit slavery in
the territories, its laws place the subject on
same footing there. as the state laws do in
the states. As, well, therefore might the
Shareholder contend that he can bring his
slaves iuto a state which prohibits slavery,
as that he can bring them in territories where
slavery is prohibited by Congress. If his
slave runs away. and enters "A non-slavehold-
ing state. he does not thereby become free,
but shall he delivered upon the claim of the
person entitled TO his services. But this is
not in consequence Of the recognition of the
right of property in such person, notwith-
standing the state laws; but in virtue Of an
express article Of the constitution, which
constitutes, one of its compromises upon the
subject of slavery. This view of the matter
was placed in a clear light in the recent de-
bates, by one Of the oldest and most distin-
guished members of the Senate, when he in
sisted that the claim on the part Of the slave
holders, though nominally to remove their
property, was, in reality to transport their
laws into the territories. One has, therefore,
only to imagine a territory governed by the
various and conflicting laws Of thirty indie
pendent states to appreciate the absurdity OF
the pretension.
But it is insisted that the prohibition cU-
ries with it a ~reproach TO The slaveholding
States, and that submission TO it would de-
grade them. This is obviously the princi-
pal, if not the material, ground of opposition
10 the measure that is persisted. IN aud most
assuredly, lift were well founded, we would
have no just ground to take exception to the
earnestness with which it is sustained. Let
the objection, therefore, be fairly and dispass-
~jonately considered. Very erroneous opinions
of the dispositions of the Northern people are
entertained by those who think them capable
of desiring the degradation of any OF the
states of the coniederacy, Watcher they be
slaveholding Or otherwise. They entertain
a too enlightened a sense of their own in
~terests; they have too just a conception of the
true glory Of the confederacy, and Of the ex-
tent to which the humiliation ola part would
tarnish the lustre of the whole and they are
above all, too national in their feelings not 10
cherish a deep soliciiude for the honor and
welfare of all its members. If they could
therefore, believe that the success of this
measure would draw after it such consequent
ces, they would be among the last to uphold
it. fit can have such a tendency, it vii
certainly not be owing to any want of gener
atty in its application.
The restriction will, of course, be obliga
tory on all who settle in the territories, fror
whatever state or country he may have emi
grated. They will, all in this respect, stan
upon an equal footing. lfany inhabitant {
any of the non-slaveholding states, who II
moves to the territories has his capital inves
ed in business transactions which are not pc
mitted by the laws of the territory, he nut
change the investment. If a STAKEHOLDER d,
sires TO remove there, he must dispose Of
slaves, and employ free labor az his countr
men and ~neighbors did, when they remove
to different portions of the northwestern tie
ritory, and in doing so made themselves pro
porous, contented, and happy.
Let us, for a moment, look at the chara
ter of this measure, and compare it with OF
ers that have gone before il. 1t is a re-e
actment OF the ordinance of 1887, which pit
hibited the introduction of slavery into ter
tories which had been ceded by several of Il
states to the United States. The difIeren
between the effects of the two measures, co
sisis only in the fact that the territory
which the ordinance of 81 was applied, W
previous to its %cession, subject to the intl
duction of slavery, whilst the territories
which it is now sought to be applied, had,
the time of the cession to us. been alrea
exempted from it by law.
Who first proclaimed the principle viii
triumphed in the enactment of the ordinan
Of 1857 Thomas Jefferson. Who promo
and secured its passage through the Contine
al Congress! All the distinguished and pa
otto men who that year represented the sla
holding states in that body, without a sol
Nv execution. Who pave the measure