Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1849-07-25


its powers, it cannot rishl(ully exercise
any Inconsistent with tho nature and nb-
iecl of The trust, or with The character oil
the party who created The trust, aud Tor
whose benefit il was created. finally hold
that instead Of having The absolute power
over The territories Of doing as il pleases,
that Congress, is restrained by all these
limitations, and that its power TO exclude
you from emigrating with your slaves in
10 them, cannot DO maintained without de-
nying that ours is government Ul spccIi
ic powers; that it is a Gnvernment ol
which States and not individuals arc the
constituents. aud that Congress holds IFS
powers as delegated and trust powers
Nor can il be maintained, without assu.
ming that ours is a consolidated Govern.
mcnt, and holds its powers absolutely in lis
own sovereign right Of doing as il plcases.
also deny The truth of his next asscr-
lion, that il has exercised the power over
the territories a. it pleased, without being
questioned until Introduced my resolu-
lions. maintain on the contrary. that
such power never was exercised by Con.
sress, until he and his associates passed
The Oregon territorial bill. That was the
first bill containing the Wilmot Pruviso,
that over passed, as has been stated--pass-
ed solely to assert the absolute right Of
doing as il plcascs. All others, including
The ordinances Of 1857 were passed as
compromises which waived The question
of power, as has been frequently shown
Nor is his assertion moro correct, that the
power never was questioned, until the in-
PRODUCTION Of my resolutions. 1t was
questioned from tho start, beginning with
the ordinance Of 1857. Mr.. Madison pro.
nounced that it was adopted without a
shadow of right. Since then, il has been
acquiesce.l in not as right, but as COM
promise until the North refused all COM
promise, and forced the South 10 stand on
its rights, where it should have Stood from
the first.
The ncx, assertion that slavery is local
in its character; that it must he enacted
by law, and cannot he carried an inch be-
yond the limits of the Stale. that enacted
it Is equally unmaintainable. 1t is clear
that in making it, he intended ~ alIirm,
that in these respects, property in slaves
stands on very different ground from every
other description Of property.
denv the Fact and maintain that there IS no
distinction between it and other property, in
that respect. II no more requires TO bc enacted
by law, or to express it more speciicaIly-,o
have positive enactment for its origin than
property in land or any thing else. The rpla-
ton of master and slave was one of The first
anI most universal forms in which property
existed. 1t is so ancient, that. there is no record
of lis origin. It's probably more ancient than
separate and distinct property in lands. aud
quite as easily defended on abstract principles.
So far from being created by positive enact.
ment; know of no instance. IN which it ever
was, or 10 express it more accurately. in which
it had lis origin in acts of legislatures 1t isnI-
ways older, than the laws which undertake tn
regulate il, and such is the case will, slavery
az It exists with us. They were for the most
part slaves in Africa, they were bought as
Slaves brought horo ns slaves, sold here ms
slaves, an held as slaves, long before any enact.
ment made them slaves. Ievcn doubt, whetl,.
or there is single Stale in the South, tlm, ever
enacted tliCm,to be slaves. There are hundreds
Of acts that recognise and regulate them as sIcl
but none. apErehend that undertake to create
them slaves. Master and slaves are constantly
regarded as pre.exis,ing relations.
Nor is it any more local in its character, Than
other property. The laws Of all countries in
reference to every thing. including property ol
every kind arc local and cannot go IN inch he.
yond the limits to which the authority of the
country extends. In cusr ofipropcrty of every
description, If IL passes beyond the authority oi
the country where il is. into another, where the
same description Of things arc regarded rs pro-
pcrty, il continues 10 he SO there, but becomes
subject TO the laws and regulations of the place
in reference 10 such property. Bm, if it be
prohibited, US property, in The country into
which It passes il ceases 10 be So unless il has
been furced in, under circumstances which
placed il under the protection of international
laws. Thus, one and the same principle apply
in this respect to all property; m things ami
mate or nanmatc, and rational or irrational.
There can be no exception; rs property every
where, and of every kind is subject In tic con.
troll Of the country. Thus far, hold that there
can be no reasonable doubt.
Nor can there he any, that the same princi.
pie applies between The several States in our
system nf government. Slaves or any ulhrl
property carried into State where il is also
property, continues slIl tobc so; but if into one,
where it is prohibited, il ceases to bc property.
This is admitted too, by all. 1t Is asu admitted
by all, that the general government cannot
override the laws Ola State, ms to what sal or
shall not be property, within the limits of its
authority. The only question then is. wIla: is
the power of the general government where its
authority extends beyond the limits of The au.
tirorily the States, regarded in their separate
and individual Character or to make it more
specific; can il determine what SHALL or shall
not be property in The territories, or wherever
else its authority extends, beyond TINT of
Of states scparuieiyl or TO make it still
more so can il establish slavefy in the terrific
rles 7 can It enact law providing tia. any
negro or mnla,to found in the territories Of tho
United States shall nc slaYe and be liable to
be seized and treated as such by whoever mny
choose to DO sol iAccording'to Col. Benlon's
doctrine that Congress may Iesslale rs it plea
ses, upon the subject Of slavery in the terrific.
rles, it would have the power, but doubt
whether there is another individual, who would
agree with him. But, lift has not The power to
establish slavery in the territories, how can il
have the power to abolish III The one is tho
counterpart OF The other, and where is The pro-.
vision ofthe constitution to be found which au>
thorzes the one and lorbiJs the oihcr7
The same question may bo propounded as
f.,p l.. IL. .I-