The Daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1845-1850, 1848-07-27
THE TERRITORIAL BILL.

said he would not discuss the merits OF the bill.
The compromise agreed upon, it was believed,
would meet the approval of the Senate The |
reason why the South had preferred it to the
Missouri compromise was, that the latter gave
very small proportion of inhabitabe territory to
the South.
Mr. Niles inquired what was the compromise
Of the bill Does it afford the power to Congress
OF egislating upon the question of slavery in the
territories?
Mr. Clayton said that the bill neither affirms
it or disaffirms it. 1t refers the subject to the
highest judicial tribunal in the country.
Mr. Niles. That amounts to just nothing at all.
The whole question has been surrendered to the
demands of the slave power.
Mr., Calhoun. We claim nothing for slavery
nothing at all; we only ask an adherence to the
Constitution. 1t is only upon this common asis
that the Union can be preserved. We wish to
maintain harmony among the members-t is on
ly by harmony MAINTAIN the Union.
Mr. Niles said it was the first time he had heard
so satisfactory declaration by the Senator from
South Carolina II his remarks are to be taken
literally, there is no subject of controversy. He
had thought that the South had claimed the right
TO carry their slaves to all the territories. But,
sir, (said Mr. Nies) by this declaration OF a com.
mon basis are not free soil, free labor, and free
principles, in our institutions, implied? Yes,
sir, but apprehend it means something else !; it
means punctilio OF inequality in the doctrine of
free soil and free labor. | inequality at all
sir. The laws by which this slave property, as
it is called, may be restricted, will be uniform
and whatever rules of property will apply to one
section, will apply to all.
Mr. Dickinson stated the difficulty of the former
debate, and in the objection to that selection of
the committee to establish compromise, the
Senator from Connecticut had said that they who
should go for compromise, might find them
selves burnt in effigy when they go home. | am
not alarmed at that threat; people who can rea.
son only by burning in efigy, are welcome to do
it. | think the Senator, however, spoke more
than was set down for him, when he spoke of
burning in efigy. Mr. D. explained the purpose
of the committee to be Cancellation and comprom-
Use, and warmly approved the bill.
Mr. Niles contrasted the bill with late speech
of Mr. Dickinson, in which he commended that
Congress had no power over slavery in the terri
tories. And what is this compromise f? 1t is
no compromise at all. 1t lodges the question in
every way; it does nothing-it settles nothing -
it amounts 10 uothing-itis worse than nothing.
IL leaves the question open; and there is the
great danger. These paltry schemes of avoiding
the slavery question for day or for momeut--
of shrinking from the duty which we owe to the
country--are. in my humble judgment, unworthy
OF the American Senate. The territory is free
by the act of God, which created it; and free by
the act OF man, and the half civilized people who
improved it, by the laws Of freedom. The ques-
ton is shall it remain so, shall we directly or
indirectly subvert the law of heaven and man.
and open 1t to different institutions? The COM
mittee shrink from responsibility there is a cow:
the issue submitted to them.
Mr. Corwin submitted few observations nre
liminary to asking whether the question of slav.
cry could be brought by writ of error before the
G,1nc A. H.. o..
vious legislation on the subject? How is the val.
ue of slave to be ascertained when we arc toId
that there is no property in man but to the value
OF his services If the value is not two Thousand
dollars, is the question to be decided bv the iudg
es appointed by the President.
Mr. Clayton, in reply to question. said that
the committee thought, after full inquiry. that
the people of the territories OF California and
New Mexico were not capable of electing dele.
gates to Congress.
Mr. Corwin. Why are they not?
Mr. Clayton. They are too ignorant
Mr. Phelps followed in reply to Mr. Corwin.
and said the question, in the outset, was to be
settled by the proper judicial tribunal it must
rest with the Supreme Court, where the Consti-
tuition placed it, aud where it must be left. It
involves construction of the Constitution of
which Congress is not the constitutional expoun-
der, here bring no Law which protects this
oPoSieo Vi PIoperty the guarantees OF the Con-
stltuton sustain US; and those guarantees will. of
course, supersede the local laws OF the conquer
ed territories. The question can be brought up
before the Supreme Court on writ of habams
corpus, and not as to the value of the slave:
where they have jurisdiction over the subject
they have jurisdiction over all the means to bring
it before the court.
Mr. Westcott wished to know whether certain
clause in the bill prohibits the governor, secreta
ry and the judges of California from passing laws
for the punishment OF vena offences of slayes.a as
class?
Mr. Phelps replied, that what laws should be
passed must be uniform; il a distinction be made
between one class OF people and another, there
would be no limit to the power to be exercised.
He was for leaving the legislative question where
Congress had placed it.
Mr. Calhoun said that the object was not to de.
eide the contested question here One side con-
tends that slavery cannot 60 into the territories
according to the constitution and laws of Mexico.
The other side take an opposite view. The Com.
mlttee did not pretend to decide the question.
Throughout they proceeded on the ground that
the constitution decided it.
Mr. Niles said he would like to know the onin.
ion OF the majority; and he asked whether the
Committee, by establishing temporary govern.
ments, and giving them the power Of local pov.
nrnment, exhausted Jurisdiction over the O,b;o.