Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1848-09-23

he existence Of this property recognised in the constitution
IL slave escapes Vermont that State Is under obga-
ton 10 restore him 10 the II an instruction in
Southern STATE all viii admit also that there constitu
ona obligation resting the Government to put down.
1t is admitted therefore, by the constitution that there pro-
perry in slaves and If the slave be freed because his master
carries him to Vermont Massachusetts,, he freed
for the that there property in the slave but be-
cause il is penalty for carrying him there II the slave
carries his property territory which Is the joint pro
perry Of all shall he be Invested Of il penalty for going
upon bis own land DO say that is his sepa-
ately solely but all Of il his jointly and dvest him
Of that property for going there would be act Of practical
abolition, which would be very little exceeded in is stretch
Of authority by for abolshng slavery in the States
But go further. If this property exists in the slave and
the not Invested Of by his own act and be
with il to his land, is not enough that Congress does
deprive him Of il by law. maintain that there is posi-
tive duty protect him in the possession and enjoyment Of
that property. II the duty Of Congress govern that Ter
ory and from this results the litigation protect the rights
Of person and property. II Congress fail doing that, il
fails OF its duty, and would I've universally acknowledged
IL the with reference any oh species Of proper
y than slaves maintain therefore that we do not call
upon Congress to establish slavery, when call upon them
protect 10 the preservation of that which they recognise
property, and which, constitutional provision existed
ALL they would be obliged 10 recognise property
sung according the law Of nations from he rights Of the
sovereignty which gave tina, character snd from the nature
Of property itself right exists until man Is Invested Of
t. either by his own act the act Of aw; and s compe-
for this Congress say that the who moves from
the slave States into this joint property viii I've dvested Of his
property a penalty for going there Has any portion Of
these join, owners right expel The others ma b, and
g purchase Of pasture in Joint tenantry, being
the Of cows Of sheep, and Of horses would il be
competent for those who owned the and horses unite
and say to the Of the sheep that he should not bring
bis stock upon the They knew beforehand that il
purchased for that very purpose They knew that the
aus purchased be held in Joint ,enaniry and that
zach had right to pasture upon the whole soil Now, il
hey do justice, they must maintain equality, and allow the
FIGHT Of each TO pasture upon the WHOLE make equal
liyision in seyeralty.
Another objection has been made relation 10 our demand
bat this right Of governing territory shall be exercised under
bose limitations which establish the equality Of the States
Is said that the good Of the States forbds t. We are
bd TO look at the immense difference between the free and
be slave States This is question: sir upon both sides Of
hich much may be said II Is question, in my humble
pnon, to be determined by crcumsances-by SOIL climate,
I'd thousand things to which cannot now advert BIZ,
choose go into that inquiry, il does not affect the
trpose Of my Argument These provisions in relation to The