Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1848-08-19


they have been wrested by force Of from feeble repub
lcthat il is acquisition by conquest II So the admis-
sion OF the Senator destroys the argument and renders quite
harmless the sentimental and yitupeatve rhetoric with which
he has assaed the rights Of the South
have been gratfed by the reply which the Senator from
Ohio has been enabled 10 give the inquiry addressed TO him
by the Senator from Maryland, (Mr JOHNSON that he is
unconscious of having used the language attributed him by
that Senator, and that used, Gas certainly was he
discams it, Having entertained sentiments of respect and
good will for the Senator from Ohio, he will add to my gat
cation if he is enabled also to dscaim, willing to recall
another portion of his remarks In speaking Of slavery as il
existed the Southern States advered the affection which
substed between the coored and the child committed
TO her The Senator pleased speak of that po-
ton OF my remarks in Of euogy and as having for
moment begued his judgment and led him to believe that
this indeed the patracha institution which was repre-
sented be- He proceeded that awakened from
WEsrcorT, in relation to the power Of the territorial egs
latues, under the provisions of this BILL establish patrol
laws which, he said, enacted in the South prevent
these aectonate from throtng their young masters
Mr. CORWIN. did not suppose the Senator from Geor-
ga could have misunderstood my meaning in the manner
In which presented the contrast referred to- All that said
on this subject the necessity Of watching these
slaves, in the form Of illustration, in playful way.
Mr.. BERRlEN. Mr. President, leave this part Of the
subject with single remark that such levty was in my
Judgment, unsued to the occasion that the which spar
kes Is that which inicts wound, and that calumny
Invested Of its odous character because uttered in the form
of sarcasm,
Let pass the consideration Of the more important
grounds Of opposition this bill The which it in
wolves SECTIONAL and the discussion Of has unhappiy
become Northern Senators oppose H. because e4rrsn-
ders what they pleased denominate the rights Of
non-sayehodng States while those Southern senator's to
whom unacceptable rest their opposition the ground
that surfenders the rights of the South 81 y sir this
must be bill Of very singular properties to b zen to such
directly opposite objections. The claims Of the North and
South are exactly opposed and yet is said to
both Now, this cannot be- One class of dispuans or
the other must be in In judgment they both so
To my Southern friends desire to submit this simple sug
gestion. The bill abstains from egsatng the yexed
question OF slavery leaves that to be decided by the people
OF the Territories when they in sufficient numbers be
admitted States and engaged in forming their State
constitutions In the mean time, if any question of freedom
slavery should arise, the judiciary will take cognzance Of
IT not by virtue OF any provision in this BILL but in the
else of their reexising jurisdiction All that does in this
buna In what this be said to be surrender OF
Southern rights, am totally at loss TO understand In
Government like ours, that which is properly called right
is something substanta-capabe Of being maintained in judi
caure and misunderstanding which court would
be bound to recognise TO that have right which
the highest Judicial tribunal would recognise admit that
have right at ALL but such Congress may be pleased
confer upon usis to concede in its whole the
gumen which urged in support OF the right Of the North
to The exclusive enjoyment Of these Territories Now sir
do not entertain this opinion. II did, thought that
strict law right could be maintained with conyic-
ton which have Of the undoubted equity Of the claim of the
South TO participate in all acquisitions made by the expend
tue OF the common blood and of all the States
would have remained SILENT and would have left the argu
ment TO be sustained by those who profit by its allow
have asserted the claim Of the South and
willing to return TO my constituents and tell them that have
asserted that claim, but had sufficient confidence in its
validity TO trust il TO judicial decision II we have right
to carry slaves into these Territories without the psrms=
sion OF Congress, (and that is the position in which this
gument places may abandon at the idea Of hav
ing any share in them, for the Missouri compromise
dxxill ha hv tha
whenever II is offered.
Blu. lie, US examine the argument Which denies this right
II thus
Slavery exists only by force Of local statutes and is not
protected beyond the limits within which they operate The
laws Of conquered country continue in force until they
repealed by the conqueror. Slavery has been abolished in
New Mexico aud California, and cannot be re established
there without the sanction of Congess-by the repeal Of the
existing law and the enactment Of law OF slavery.
Now sir, is not true in point Of fact that slavery exists
has existed only by force OF local statutes The fact has
been assumed in certain judicial decisions and has been
aed here but is contradcted in Others and is utterly
variance with the historic record Of the original Stses
Whoever will consult this will find that slavery existed in all
the colonies before any law passed to authorize it,
introduced into them by the cupy Of the mother country
(seekng avail herself Of the profits Of the African slave
trade and Of the market which the colonies afforded for the
sale Of slaves not only without any local law authorize it.
but in the lace Of the circumstances OF the coonst aud of
passed by local Legislatures which negatived by
the royal Governors When, in process Of time, il became
tngush between those who free and those who
slaves, such laws passed. but slavery existed long
nor TO their enactment The Of Georgia is striking in
this particular That colony settled in 1882 under the
government Of trustees which continued Tor about twenty
years. when they surrendered their charter, and became
royal province. In l735 the passed prohibiting
the and importation the colony yet in despite
Of this they introduced from South Carolina that
when the government Of the ceased deemed adj
vsabe to repeal the prohbory But the first law recog-
nng the existence Of slavery in that colony passed
l770 twenty years AFTER SUCH examination, will
be found have been the fact doubt not oil the colonies
There is express recognition Of il in decided in
Louisiana in which the say II admitted fact that
slavery has been permitted and tolerated in all the colonies
established in America by the mother country. And again
Slavery existed in the colonies long before any legislative
Of the mother country authorizing their introduction except
the charter OF the African company and before colonial
act had passed declaring its existence
In decided in Virginia. the court say The slavery
OF the African has existed from the time Of bringing them into
the coony-in many States by express enacments declaring
them slaves, in others by custom
In Virginia il is certain that slavery existed long before any
local laws passed authorize nsy, Notwithstanding
the Provincial Legislature attempted impose tar which
would amount to prohibition Of their importation and
little foundation there for the assertion that slavery exists
only BY force Of local statues which has often been made
on this floor that in the from Louisiana, 10 which have
first referred, the say II may be laid down legal
AXIOM that in all Governments in which the municipal regu
aons not absolutely opposed TO slavery persons reduced
TO that state may be held in IL.
The foundation of the first proposition the assumed fact
which rests 10 therefore taken from II. II is not rue
have SEEM that slavery exists only by force Of local
tu,es II existed in these colonies long anterior to any local