Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1848-09-05
THE COMPROMISE BILL-TdE dEoN'
GIA BARNBURNER.

,;x,3 , s,,y.hoIder does not lose MS properly
-, irwin, his slave into them. For, We Con.
,e,ded II the relation OF master ana slave
n ha dissolved the moment they entered Inc 0''
,or;.s CO would be that of husband and vile a"'
parenl and child, and we would reVef' 70 80"
of nature wilhou, law, without government 'nu
no.sessed of none but our natural 'as"'H
o,ber words we would have q" rights winch a
Stale of society conters, and The C0ntt''"''' 5"
,ss rrwted States would he wholly imperative
nd we argued that, slaves being properly IN 'i'e
territories, which The Constitution n'shes +" ~
du,y o, The Federal Courts 10 prete1t, MeN'0""
law prohibiting slavery would destrop mai pro-
perty, and of course would be inconsistent WIN
the Constitution.
Judge Mclean, 10 his letter 10 The pu'i"'o
Convention, just published says :" " ''"0 ~,
the sanction of la,o, slavery can no nioie =.
in a territory than man can oiea'he ".A
ou, air" Is not this monslrous proposi''on
The doctrine Of the Richmond Wing, Mr. pan'e'
and Mr.. S,ephens, and all who believe the JON
promise Bill surrender OF Southern t's"."' :"
mos, conclusive refuiation is 10 be ioupo III '"e
lac, that The Northern people have oeeh ~''''"s
n neril The Union in order 10 Obtain law u
Congress prohibiting slavery in The territories :
| n &C Jusrce Mclean contends, slavery cannon
e,is, in ,hs territories OF the United States unoef
any CIRCUMSTANCES whether populated OF vacant
whether acquired by conquest or discovery WIN
our a law being enacted TO establish II, Whefe -
there The slich'es, necessity for the Wilmo' FRO
yso, or an &C, OF Congress TO proA'ou ~
! Before leaving this branch of argument We
will notice another mons,rous absurdi'y oil W.
Stephens and his Northern allies Ihey hoiu
that Shareholder would lose his slave by carry
iDp him iplo New Mexico and California, lof me
yery same reason that he wocld / So him oy car
ryinc him into New York or Massachusetts; aho
hat reason is that slavery is prohibited in all tour
STATES or territories"
We answer, l. That Now Mexico and Can
fornia are not like New York and Maisachu
sets, distinct sovereigntes They have none
of the attributes of sovereignty; they are IN inc
language of the Constitution, mere "properfy
belonging to the United States. 2. The lands oil
New York belong exclusively TO the people OF
New York; those of New Mexico and Callior
MIA belong to the people Of all the United States.
g. Blu, the great difference, which the Georgian
seems uholly to forget, between the laws oil New
York and the laws Of New Mexico and Cali
fornia is that the former are enacted by the
representatives Of the people of New York, TO
affect only the interests Of the people of New
York, in territory which is their exclusive
property; while the laws of the latter, whether
enacted by the General Government, or BY Ter
ritorial Governments established BY the Gene
raj Government, or by lNerico, before they pass
ed under the dominion of the United States,
which hare been al.o,ged 10 remain IN force bu NE
General Gorernment, that is, which have been i'm
pliedly re-enacted Iy Tie General Government, IN
accordance wi b the humanity OF the modern
law of nations, TO prevent az entire state OF
anarchy in those territories, derive all thci7 va
Ndtv, as laws, from The General Government;
that is, from the representative, Of all NE people
of all the States, TO affect the Interests Of he peo-
pie of al the States, in territories arhith "6e.
ling to the peopl, Of al the States.
We have thus presented VIVA may be termed
The general argument derived from the nature Of
The institution 0. African slavery in the United
States and the sanction which that institution
has received in tie Constitution OF The United
| States 10 show lha, any unrepealei law OF Mex
leo in New Mexico and California prohibiting
slavery is inconsistent with" that Instrument
The constitutional argnuicnt-lhat IS, the arsu-
men, derived from the terms and the express Ian.
| puaee OF the Conslilulion-s sill stronger. The
Richmond Wing denies that Messrs. Daniel and
Stephens admit the constiIutionali'y OF The VIII
mot Proviso. Then, all The arguments which
have been used 10 show that Congress, with all
its powers in the territories, which some have
though, supreme and unlimited, cannot prohibit
slavery in those territories, apply with Ten fold
force 10 show that any u1repcat,d lar # .N.rtco
cannot have the same effect.
l. An overwhelming argument may be derived
from those clauses in The Constitution which re-
coenize slaves as property. The simple question
presented for The decision OF me Supreme Court
will be, are slaves property 10 ,heterilories, Con-
sress never having prohibited them from being
carried into the territories, and that Court having
expressly decided, in the case Of Prigg Us the
Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania, ha. they are
property in The Slares7 No. says Alexander
Hamilton Stephens. No! says this Georgian
arch.rai,or-lhey are not property in The terrific
ries they are not even property in the STATES |;
they are mere muu,sipa, regulation they are
mere statats-a mere creature OF legislation.
While the Stale Governments shall no, dare 10
take away mans lands or his goods without
annul or conhscae, his slave property, just as
easily as they may repeal, alIer or moilfy The
statute Of limitations, lha, Of descens and di.lr.
button, or their penal awsl The Constitution
protects and guarantees our right 10 our slaves as
property in the States, and no where torbids us
from carrying them, or any other properly, into
the territories. This Georgian says that Mc1i-
can unrepeaed law shall no, deprive rs OF our
other property, but may take away from u,
may utterly destroy our slave properly. Halt
the States OF this Union are slave States
No more tremendous exercise OF sovereignty can
be imagined than the abolition o. slavery il all
those States. An equally tremendous exercise
OF The sovereign power would be ioe cnsiqrem n,
of the African race in those State, il thew were
now all Tree. Yet This execulioner Of the Com
promise bill SAYS that Mezieaa ldr, anless re-.
pealed is TO prescribe the very structure and or.
eanxation oil society in New Mexico and Cali.
tornia, so long as they remain territories Of these
Uni'ed States Merriam lao is as sovereign in
this matter OF slavery-can as completely prohi-
biz and keep out slavery as any OF the sovereign
States Of This Union Or as he holds tina, the
prohibition OF slavery is an exercise, not OF the
sovereign, but Of the law-making power, then he
breaches that slavery may be abolished though
Out the Union as easily a, the Statute of lmita.