The Daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1845-1850, 1848-08-26

produced this discussiOn-has passed both branch
es OF the National Legislature, and received the
constitutional approval OF the present Executive
AN approval which it was his sworn duty 10
withhold, if he had not been satisfied that all the
provisions of the bill were in conformity to the
Constitution The present President, also a
stakeholder, elected from a savehoding State,
with a large portion of his Cabinet in the same
situation, has given the highest sanction to the
doctrine we contend for, that is known to our in.
stiutions; and although he felt himself called
upon to make an extra message, setting forth his
for believing that the restriction ought not
to be applied to our Mexican Territories, he does
not take the slightest notice Of the constitutional
objection on which so many Southern States had
based their opposition TO the general measure
This branch OF the subject has been thus, and
we hope forever, disposed Of
1t is farther commended. that slaves are so far to
be regarded as property as to authorize their
owners to carry them into any of the territories,
and to hold them there, notwithstanding any act
which Congress may pass upon the subject. II
Congress have the constitutional power to prohb-
it Slavery in the territories. its laws place the
subject on the same footing there, as the State
laws do in the States. As well, therefore, might
the STAKEHOLDER contend that he can bring his
slaves into State which prohibits slavery, as that
he can bring them in Territories where slavery
is prohibited by Congress. If his slave runs
States, he does not thereby become free, but
shall be delivered up upon the claim of the per.
son entitled to his services. But this is not in
consequence OF the recognition of the right of
property in such person, notwithstanding the
State laws; bnt in virtue of an express article of
the Constitution, which constitutes one of it's
compromises upon the subject OF Slavery This
view OF the matter was placed in a clear light in
the recent debates, by one of the oldest and most
distinguished members of the Senate, when he
insisted that the claim, on the part of the slave
holders, though nominally to remove their proper
ty, was, in reality TO transport their laws into.
the territories One has, therefore only TO i'm
agine territory governed by the various and
conflicting laws of thirty Independent States, to
appreciate the absurdity of the pretension
But it is insisted that the prohibition carries
with it reproach to the saveholdng Srates and
that submission to it would degrade them This
Is obviously the principle, if not the material
ground OF opposition to the measure that is per.
sisted in; and most assuredly, If it 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 dispassionately considered. Worry erroneous
opinions of the dispositions OF the Northern PEG.
pie are entertained by those who think them ca
pablo OF desiring the degradation of any OF the
states OF the Confaderacy, whether they be
siaveholding or otherwise. They entertain too
enlightened sense OF theiI own interests thew
have too just conception of the true glory of the
Contederacy, and OF the extent to which the hui
initiation OF part would tarnish the ustre of the
whole; and they above all, too national in
tneir FEELINGS, not to cherish deep socitude for
the honor and welfare OF all its members. If
they could, therefore, believe that the success of
the measure would draw after it such grave con-
sequences, they would be among the last to up
hold it. II it can have such tendency, it will
certainly not be owing to any want of generality
in its application.
The restriction, will, of course, be obligatory
on all who settle in the territories from whatev.
er State or country they may have emigr,,ed
They will all, in this respect, stand upon an equal
footing. Ii any inhabitant of any of the nom
slaveholding States, who removes to the terrific
ries, has his capital invested in business transac
tons, which are not permitted by the laws of the
territory, he must change the investment If
STAKEHOLDER desires TO remove there, he must dis.
pose OF his slaves, and employ free labor as his
countrymen and neighbors did, when thew re-
moved to different portions OF the North western
Territory, and in doing So made themselves pros
porous, con tented and happy.
Let US tor moment look at the character of
this measure, and compare it with others that
have gone before it. 1t is re enactment of the
Ordinance of 1887, which prohibited the intro.
duction OF Slavery into territories which had
Ueou Ceucu ny SeNeTdI OI the states to the Uni
ted States. The difference between the effects
of the two measures, consists only in the fact,
that the territory to which the Ordinance OF 's7
was applied, was, previous to its cession, subject
ed to the introduction of Slavery; while the ter
ritories to which it is now sought to be applied.
had, at the time OF the cesson to us, been already
exempted from it by law. VINO first proclaimed
the principle which triumphed in the enactment
OF the Ordinance of 1887 Thomas Jefferson.
Who promoted and secured its passage through
the Continental Congress All the distinguish
ed and patriotic men who that year represented
the slaveholding States in that body, without
solitary exception. Who gave to the measure
his Official sanction, by approving bill to carry
it into effect under the new government
George Washington. Within the last sixty wears.
aud down to 1888, the same enactment has been
again and again repeated, with the general con-
eurrence OF the Southern members, and often
through their particular instrumentaity. A full
filth OF the States OF the Union has been organ.
lied as territories under its restrictions. In re-
spect to Ohio, the Oldest of them, conformity TO
this principle in the Ordinance OF 's7. was re.
quired even in the State Constitution and pov
eminent, and the bill giving to the ordinance this
application, was reported by Committee OF
which William B. Giles, of Va was chairman.
and John Rutledge OF s. C. membar II ,,as