Juliet signal. [volume] (Juliet [i.e. Joliet], Ill.) 1844-1???, 1848-10-03

take announcer ground, and l say 10 you
that Gen. Cass is safer for your particular
wishes than any other man. Let us look
at the opinions of few men upon this
subject. Here are Daniel Webster, Judge
Mclean, and Judge Bronson. Hear
them $50
Extact from speech Of Mr.. Webster in
the u. s. Senate OH the Willnot proviso:
SIT will not be commended that this sort
of personal slavery exists by general law.
1t exists only by local iaU. l do not mean
to deny the validity of that local law where
it is established, but | say it is after all
nothing but local law. And wherever that
local law does not extend, property in
persons does not exist. Well sir what is
now the demand on the part of our south
ern friends E? They say sswe will carry our
local laws~with US wherever we 90. We
insist that congress does US injustice unIes
it establishes in the territories into which
we wish TO 60, our own local laws"
Now this is very different view from
that which is presented to you here. Your
speaker has been talking about the pro.
hibition of slavery there as though it al.
ready existed, while the South is claiming
that Congress shall ertend IL there, and
Gen. Cass doubts the power of Congress
to do so. Now who among these is the
safest?
But let us see what Judge Mclean
says on this subject. | will read you but
one extact from his letter to the Buffalo
conventions:
"Resting upon the principles Of the
constitution as they have been judicially
settled, the free States, by moderation,
vigilence and firmess may prevent the
extension of slavery to the free territory
lately acquired. Without the sanction
oflaw. slavery can no more exist in ter
ritory than man can breathe without air.
Sldres gre not property where they arc
not made SO By the municipal ldw."
Judge Bronson, of the Supreme Court
of New York, is equally explicit, in his
letter he says:
81 am utterly opposed to the extension
OF slavery into any territory of the U. S.
where it does not now exist. But do not
think it either necessary or expedient to
call upon Congress to legislate on the
subject. The relation of master and slave
does not exist by the law of nature; nor
has the claim of the master, like the right
to property in general, been recognized
by all civil communities. Slavery connot
exist where there is no positive law TO
uphold it. 1t is not necessary that it should
be forbidden ii is enough that it is not
specially authorized. Ii the owner OF
slaves removes with or sends them into
any country, state or territory. where
slavery does not exist by law, they will
from that moment become free men, and
will have as good right to command the
master, as he will have to command them.
State laws have no extra territorial au
thority; ard law of Virginia which
makes man slave there, cannot make
him slave in New York, nor beyond the
Rocky Mountains.
Undertaking no doubt upon the ques-
ton, can see no occasion for asking
Congress to legislate against the exten.
sion of slavery into free territory, and, as
a question of policy think it had better
be leta lone our southern brethren wish
to carry their slaves to Oregon, New
Mexico or California, tLey will be under
The necessity Of asking law to warrant
it; and it will then be time for the free
States to resist the measure, as cannot
doubt they would with unwavering firm.
ness.
81 would not needlessly move this ques
ton as it is one of an exciting nature.
which tends to sectional division, and
may do US harm as people. | would
leave it to the slave holding States to de-
eide for themselves and on their own re.
sponsibility, when, ifever,the matter shall
be agitated in Congress. 1t may be that
they will act wisely, and never move at
all--especially as it seems pretty general.
ly agreed. that neither Ore gon, NewMex.
leo nor California, are we'll adapted to
slave labor. But if our southern brethren
should make the question, we shall have
no choice but to meet it; and whatever
consequences may follow, trust the PEG.
pie ofthe Free States will give united
voice against allowing slavery on a sin.
gle foot of soil where it is not now auth.
orized by laws
They tell us that California and New
Mexico are free and cannot possibly be
slave territory, unless Congress establish
es it there.
The Supreme Court of the State of
Louisiana, 8 Louisiana Rep, has decided
that when slave was taken by his mas.
ter to France, that being free territory he
became absolutely free, and did not again
put. on the character Of slave by returning
to Louisiana. In Massachusetts and sew
eral other states, the same doctrine has
been held. and is now undoubtedly the
established law of the state.
lin Prigg Us. The Commonwealth, Judge
Story in delivering the opinion of the Su.
preme Court of the United States, says