Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1849-07-30

that has any OF any description, except such
specifically delegated, that necessary AMI prop
carry them into execution. maintain that all its
powers delegated aud trust powers, and not posi-
tive and absolute, and that all Of the latter des-
crpOn belong exclusively to the people OF the several
States in their sovereign character. also hold thai
Congress Jut their representative aud trustee, and
that in carrvngnto execution its powers, it cannot
ghtfuly exercise any inconsistent with the natureand
object of the trust with the character of the party
who created the trust, for whose benefit it Gre
ated | finally hold that, instead Of having the alb
solute power the territories of doing pleases
congress restrained by all these limitations and that
its power to exclude you from emigrating with your
slaves into them cannot be mainland without denying
that ours Government Of which States, and not in
dv duas the constituents and that Congress hold
its powers as delegated and trust powers MORGAN it
be maintained without assuming that ours is a conso
dated Government and holds its powers absolutely in
its own sovereign right Of doing as it pleases.
also deny the truth Of his next assertion that it
has exercised the power over the territories it
pleased, without being questioned, until introduced
my resolutions maintain on the contrary that such
power never was exercised by Congress- until be and
his associates passed the Oregon territorial BILL That
was the first bill containing the Wmot Proviso that
ever passe has been sated-passed solely to assert
the absolute right of doing as pleases. All Others
including the ordinance of l7S7, were passed COM
promises, which waived the question Of power, has
been frequently shown Nor is his assertion more
correct that the power never questioned from the
start, beginning with the ordinance of 1877. Mr.
Madison pronounced that 1t was adopted without a
shadow ofrght Since then has been acquiesced in
not a right but a compromise, until the North
fused all compromise and forced the South to stand
on its rights where it shou have stood from the
first.
The next assertion that slavery local in its char
acter that it must be enacted by law, and cannot be
carried an inch beyond the limits of the State that
enacted it, is equally unmantainabe. 1t is clear that
in making it, he intended to affirm that in these
poets property slaves stands very different ground
from every other description of property.
deny the fact, and maintain that there it no dis
tnction between it and other property in that res
pect 1t no requires to be enacted by law, to
express it specifically to have positive enact
ment tor its origin than property land or any thing
else The relation of master and slave one of the
first and most universal forms in record of its origin
1t probably more ancient than separate and distinct
property in lands and quite easily defended alb
stract principles. So far from being created by pos
tive enactment know of no instance in which it
was; or to express it accurately in which it had
its origin in acts of Legislatures 1t is always older
than the laws which undertake to regulate it. and such
is the case with slavery, as it exists with us They
were for the most part slaves in Africa; they We're
bought slaves, brought here slaves sold here
slaves and held slaves, long before any enactment
made them slaves | even doubt whether there is a
single State in the South that enacted them to be
slaves. There hundreds ofacts that recognise and
regulate them sech, but none, apprehend, that
dertake to create them slaves Master and slaves are
constantly regarded pre-existng relations.
Nor is it any local in its character than other
property The laws Of all countries, in reference to
every thing including property of every kind are To-
/ and cannot 90 inch beyond the limits to which
authority OF the country extends. In Of prop
erty of every description if it passes beyond the
thority of the country where it is into another where
the same description of things regarded prop
erty it continues to be there but becomes subject
to the laws and regulations of the place in reference
to such property But it be prohibited property
in the country into which passes it to be
unless it has been forced in under circumstances which
placed it under the protection OF international laws
Thus and the principle apply in this respect
to all property in things animate or inanimate, and
rational irrational. There be exceptions as
property every where and kind subject TO the control
of the authority of the country. Thus far hold that
there can be no reasonable doubt.
Nor can there be any that the same principle APP
plies between the several States in system of gov
eminent. Slaves any other property carried into
Statevhe it is also property continues still to be so
but if into one where it is prohibited it ceases to be
property This is admitted too by all 1t is also ad
mitted by all that the General Government cannot
overrule the laws of State as to what shall, or
shall not be property within the limits of its
thority. The only question then is, what is the pow
er OF the General Government where its authority
tends beyond the limits of the authority Of the States
regarded in their separate and individual character?-
Or to make it specific, can it determine what
shall not be property in the territories, wherever
else its authority extends. beyond that of the States,
separately? Or, to make it still more so, it
tablsh slavery in the Territories? Can it enact law
providing that any negro mulatto found in the Ter
rtores Of the United States shall be slave, and be
liable to be seized and treated such by whoever may
choose to do so? According to Colonel Bentons doc
trine, that Congress may legslate it pleases upon
the subject of slavery in the territories it would have
the power, but doubt whether there is another in
divdual whowould agree with him. But if it has not
the power to establish slavery 10 the territories how
can it have the power to abolish it The is the
counterpart of the other and where the provision Of
the Constitution to be FOUND which authorizes the one
and forb;ds the other
The same question may be propounded as to public
and private vessels belonging to the United States and
their citizens on the high seas for the principle which
applies to the territories equally applies to Them and
all places which the authority Of the General Gov
eminent extends, beyond the States regarded sepa
rately.
tits, indeed great misconcephon of the character
and object of the General Government to suppose that
it has the power either to establish abolish slavery
any other property where its authority extends be
yond the limits of the States, regarded individually.
Its authority is but the united and joint authority Of
several States, conferred upon it by constitution
adopted mutual agreement, but by the separate act
of each States in like in every respect each
adopted its separate constitution with the single
exception that was adopted without and the other
mutual agreement OF all the States 1t is them in
fact the constitution of each State, as much SC as
its separate constitution and only the consti-
tuition of all the States because it is that of each. As
the constitution made the General Government that
too Is in like manner as much the government of each