The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1848-06-28
M. n.s,sa4sawm No r.sasss ~, " ~, nv u

RESTORATION OF IuDtve slaves.
Mr.. HAssEoAN-Indiana has passed such Law.
Mr.. BUTLER explained that Indiana and Michigan
were exceptions.
MIR. INSTRUMENTATION, assuredly is
MIR. CALHous-I am glad to hear 1t | should be hap
Ply to hear that there organized companies tor
running off slaves in Ohio, and other States.
MIR. CoRwrs- Does the Senator say there ncor-
porsted companies of this sort in Ohio,
MIR. CALHouN-Oh, no; | said organized companies.
MIR. BurLrn-And if the Senator from Ohio wants
evidence OF this fact, procure it, We have the
proofs Fa
Mr. CALHous resumed-The South had acuuiesced
to the federal ordinance They acqussced to the
Missouri compromise They have not acquesced TO
the other side.
MIR C. then defended Mr. Jefferson in his position
this question. He had the apprehe nsions of
this abolition which entertain. In letter to
Mr. Adams in 1919, he says he feels uneasiness in
respect to the bank bankrupt laws manufacto.
res, treaties all these pillows that will pass
der the ships but the Missouri question is greater
that bar; the vessel of State may be stranded and
foundered" This was in 1919 In 1920 the compromise
came up.
Here Mr.. c. had letter read from Jefferson to John
Holmes, dated April 81 1920, in which this Missouri
question is compared to fire bell in the night, filing
the mind with terror, sounding like knel Of the
Union, and the question which cannot be obiterat
ed We have the wolf by the ears and can neither
hold him or let him go,'' sc. Such the prophetic
fears Of Mr. Jefferson MIR President mark those pro-
phetc words mark the profound reasoning upon which
1t is founded, mark the prophetic and melancholy i'm
preston which made upon his mind Sir, there is evi
d.nce of great foresight deep patriotism and profound
nchoy and yet the date of Jefferson Is used to
ganize sectional differences on this very question He
~srv
that short proposition to the first ordinance on the
government. In consequence, however, in my opinion
of the state of the times, nd which may explain in
the course of my remarks having shown there is no
power In the government and the Missouri compro-
mise and all other compromises fall to the ground.
come to the question-has Congress any power to lie.
gislate Sir 1t would be foolish and ideal to deny its
power while we are legsatng here for the establish
msnt ofa territory when session up and moves
to lay the bill the table Yes sir Congress has pow
and the only question is frst for whom Is it done
and secondly, what Is its honor? Judge Mar
shall states that the power applies to that Of
acquiring territory end am more thoroughly con-
frmed in this view, because, long before Of
Judge Marshals opinion, entertained the opin-
ion II you acquire territory you do for pur-
pose you acquire to occupy to possess, to use and
CONTROL to if not this power would be the
most absurd and ridiculous thing in the world agree
with the Senator from New York to-day, that have
the right to acquire territory 1t belongs to the
making power; but sir If there be gentleman who
differs from me, have not word to say. regard the
agency as of no Importance; let it be what it may it
does not exist absolute power l recognize it as
the sole power; but that is very different thing from
despotic All despctc powers absolute but it
does not follow that all powers absolute. Sir
forbidden by the constitution to grant patents Of
nobility. Can do that In territories! We are per-
mitted except in of war to suspend the habeas
corpus act Can We do so in territories? All these
are limitations and being show that the power Of
Congress is not absolute But this Is not ALL We are
the trustees Of the people the represe
tves to administer the territories the benefit of all
We are merely invested with trust power. We have
no absolute power over tie question. appeal to all
able lawyers this floor If trust power is not limited
to keeping for the trustees to whom the property
belongs. Now, sir, I ask to whom the property
belongs To tho people Of the United States
Have you right, as security trust to make dis
elimination between one class of citizens and
ther! Have you a right to exclude portion Of
citizens because they slave property by excluding
their prope ty? No, sir; you have not There
two other propositions which Lave been presented, if
have the right to establish their laws in this
spec Well, sir. must be either bound by consti-
tuition or by other power If the former there all
the arguments fall to the ground II the latter there
sir the territories Instead of being the territories Of he
United States become the territories Of the people
plying them the very first naf dozen Of squat
ters who dvest you of your territories You conquer
territory Of Msxco and the inhabitants of it, the Next
become the of it, and not you, according
to this most absurd idea The Protestant religion
not enter Mexico until we have law to allow it, for
such law? No. sir; 1t is absurd Well, sir. will you
say that cattle and citizens cannot go to Calfor
MIA until you have law passed to repeal their law for
their law prohibits it, and law against slavery is just
absurd as these' Mr.. President, have stated
all the points intend to put and have stated enough
think; may say have made out my case, that
power exists which prohibit any portion of the
citizens from equal rights but If sophstry could make
this sppear to be constitutional, it is not sufficient
you possess power to exercise it you must show,
your justly and rightly to do The constitution
nay give you power, but the question is you
righfuy aud justly do so? Sir, put the question
soemny to the -slaveholding States, for wish
do so in all solemnity-can they justly and righful
fully do so? We partners rghtfully we have given
share Of the common fund for the common good,
and you justly and rghtfully exclude us If you
exclude you must approve Of the principle that in
partnership Of common rights the stronger party
rightfuly exclude the weaker from equal share
But come to the queston-how the territory
acquired! ! think that acquired it in couso
quence of the purchase of Louisiana. From our
purchases from Spain next; by the discoveries of
Lewis and Clark; and next in the Jefferson negotia-
tons Louisiana cost fifteen Million Florida five
million coming out Of common fund. The explora-
lions under Lewis and Clark paid for out of n
common fund-so that under every aspect VIC full
contributors to all Now, sir, would it be proper I'M
der all these aspects, to deprive of equal rights,
Would you do it In private nfe' And why, II you
would not to thirty men, should you do it to thirty
States? Well, come to California and New Mexico.
Have the slave holding States had equal share in
the war; In both ways fortune that larger
portion Of military rcnown would fall to the share
of the South than the North Well, shall ter