Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1849-06-14

gives them, and no legislative power
but that which Congress allows them.
Congress governs the territory as il
pleases, and in way Incompatible with
the constitution. and of this any State
that has been territory is a complete
example, and our own as much so as
any.
Congress has the power TO prohibit,
or admit slavery, and no one else. 1t
is not in the territories; for their gov
ernments are the creatures of Congress,
and its deputies so far as any legsa
tive power is concerned. 1t is not in
the States seParately;Iand this leads to
one of the grossest decisions which
has grown GU, Of the political meta
physics of Mr.. Calhoun. He claims
a right for the citizens of the slave
States to remove to New Mexico and
California with their slave property.
This is profound error. The property
is in the law which creates it, and that
law cannot be carried an inch beyond
the limits Of the State which enacts it.
No citizen, of any State, can carry any
property derived from law of tina,
State, an inch beyond the boundary
line Of the State which creates it. The
instant he passes that boundary to set.
tie with his property, it becomes sub.
Iect TO another law, if there is one, and
is without law if there is not. This is
the case with aIl-wilh the northern
man, with his corporations and fran
chises--with the southern man and his
slaves.--This is the law of the land,
and lei any one try it that disputes il.
! We, in Missouri, are well situated to
make the experiment conveniently. and
in all its forms. Let any one of Mr..
Calhoun's followers try it, and he will
soon see what becomes of his proper
ty, his slave properly. Let him re.
move TO Iowa: he will meet there the
Slh section of the act Of Congress of
March 9Th, lS2O-the Calhoun provi-
SO; and will in vain invoke State rights,
and Missouri Statutes. Let him re-
move to Illinois: he will find there the
Jefferson Proviso, in the form of the
ordnance of 1887. Let him remove
10 Kentucky: the law of Kentucky
takes hold of his slave, and converts
the chattel interest of the Missouri
slave into real estate; for, in Kentucky
slaves are now made real estate, and
placed on the footing of land, as they
are in Louisiana.-Let him move into
Arkansay: his chattel slave will remain
chatteI, but by virtue of Arkansas
law, and subject to its regulation. FL
nally, let him remove west, and settle
in the territory of Nebraska, when it
shall be created; and the Calhoun pro.
viso will be on him again; and his pro.
perty will evaporale. Thus, citizen
of Missouri cannot get out Of his own
State, on any Of its four sides, with his
slave property without having lis char
acter altered, or holding it by another
law; and twice he will lose it--on two
sides of his State, on contiguous terri
tory--he will lose it under an act of
Congress which became a law under
the advice and.opinion of Mr.. Calhoun,
in his high character of cabinet minis
ter, and assisting at council armed
with the veto power. This is the case
of the Missouri citizen, and has been
ever since Missouri was a State; and
no one ever thought the State sover-
eisn y insulted, or felt himself bound to
dissolve the Union on account of it.
No! the citizens of the States cannot
carry the laws Of their States with
them to Oregon and California; and if
they could, what Babel of slave law
would be there Fourteen States! each
carrying code different in many res.
poets from each other; and all to be ex
ercised by the same Judges, in terrific
ries where there is no slave law, What
absurdity! No such thing can be done,
The only effect of carrying slaves there
would be TO set them free. 1t would
be in vain TO invoke the constitution,
and say it acknowledges property in
slaves. 1t does so: but that is confined
10 States:
And now we arrive al substance-at
a practical point. Congress has the
Constitutional power to abolish slave
ry in Territories; but she has no slave
territory in which to exercise the pow
err. We have no territory but the re-
mainder of Louisiana north and west OF
INSIGNIFICANT in California, New
Mexico and Oregon,-and that north
of Wisconsin, now Minnesotah. In
Louisiana, north and west of US, it was
abolished by Congress in 1920. In
the territory north of Wisconsin, now
Minnesota, il was abolished by the
Jefferson proviso Of 1887. In Oregon
it was abolished by Congress in 1913,
by what you may call the Benton pro-
; viso, if you please. In New Mexico
, and California il was abolished by the
5 Mexican government in ls29-con,
: firmed in 1887, and again in 1874
!, Here are the DEGREES, the originals OF
/, which | have read in the authentic