The North-Carolina standard., 1849-07-18
TILE SLAVERY QUESTION.

h6Q1SLer
exhausted at least fifteen columns in reply to It and
with all candor do not perceive that they have
met the first point we made on that occasion. They
have decaimed, denounced shifted, misinterPreted,
eyaded, shufied and concealed but as all this Is m
strict accordance with their former conduct on this
and other questions, it doubtless looked Tor oy
many, and we are not surprised at 1t.
The Register of the 7th instant takes up that part
of our article in which we show the recognition by
the Constitution of Slavery and demonstrate the un-
constitutionality of the Wilmot Provso; and quoting
from u.s. liberaly enough be sure, it essays to an
swer us. It saws, for instance, that if mean SO
and so, it agrees with US; but not, not. We meant
inst what we said, and we said what we meant Our
language it seems to u.s. is too plain to be misunder-
stood. and too direct to be fairly evaded. We took
the ground that Slavery was recognized by the Con-
sttution of the United States that Congress is body
with delegated powers, and can pass no law which
the Constitution does not expressly grant 1t the power
pass or which may not be necessary to carry out
said express grant that the States sovereign and
eouals that they are entitled to share equally with
mt reference to their local institutions local Iegu-
lations in the benefits and blessings of the public
domain; that the Wimot Proviso would discriminate,
both in theory and practice, against the slave and In
favor of the free States and, such being the case
its enactment by Congress would be unwarranted by
the letter of the Constitution and contrary to its true
intent and meaning. These, in substance, are the
propositions laid down by that OCCASION. The
Register has not thus far answered them, andneve
will.
TIE Register attempts an answer to one point in
the above propositions, which is really too weak
for such as that paper espouses. 1t says sit
is not true point of fact, that the Wilmot Proviso
offers these territories, without hindrance restrc-
ton, to the non-slavehoding States, and c1ses,te
against the STAKEHOLDER, unless he first abandons his
property and leaves it behind him "-but that '' 1T
forbids 10 the Northern ,0eN the Southern naun,
the possession of slaves nthe Territories -; and 1t
then goes to IS suppose that citizen of Massa-
chusetts might desire to carry slaves to California,
and asks whether in such case, this Provso would
not discriminate against him also! What question!
Does Massachusetts own any slaves =? Is she not
free State And would not this Proviso operate for
her and against us1 What would " a citizen of
Massachusetts be apt to say, if Southern man
were to stand forward in Congress, and, by 'ody Of
rinieating Southern rights qnd the manhood and reason
af tie Soufh to declare, voluntarily, that this
Proviso was common in its nature, and migM affect
Massachusetts as well North Carolina Nv What
would he think? He might not say it, but he would
think and he would feel, that the man who would
hunt up reasons apd such reasons, why he might be
degraded and stripped of his rights, and why, un-
der view Of matter he might regard that measure
as general one which was intended to operate upon
and destroy him, was apoer selfish dupe who thought
more of his party than of the soil he sprung from
and that any State which, could commission such
man to Congress, and endorse such views and such
doctrines after he got there, deserved to be tampled
down by all the power of sectional majority, and
then expelled from the Union.
But the Register, perceiving how important it is
that in yielding dangerous power to Congress as
that of enacting the Wimot Proviso it should have
some express grant to that effect in the Constitution,
upon which to rely, resorts to the following sections
Congress shall have power to dispose of and
make all needul rules and regulations respecting the
Territory or other property belonging to the United
States.''
This grant of power, says the Register is perfectly
clear and explicit -and underi argues that paper,
Congress has the power enact the Wilmot Provso.
This be it remembered, is from newspaper printed
in slaveholding State; and shall meet it with !
an extract from letter written in 1847, by citizen
Of free State, and often falsely denounced by this
very paper Aboltionist. In his celebrated
Nicholson letter Gen. Cass says:
In various respects the Territories differ from the
States Some of their rights inchoate, and they
do possess the peculiar attributes of sovereignty.
Their relation to the general government is very inn
perfectly defined by the constitution; and it will be
found upon examination, that in that instrument the
only grant of power concerning them is conveyed in
the phrase, Congress shall have the power to dis
pose of and make all needful rules and regulations,
respecting the territory and other property belonging
to the United States" Certainly this phraseoogy
is very loose, if it were designed to include in the
grant the whole power of Legislation persons,
well things The expression the "territory and
other property fairly construed, relates to the public
lands, such to arsenals dockyards, forts, ships,
and all the various kinds of property, which the Uni
ted States may and must possess.
But surely the simple authority to dispose Of and
regulate these does not extend to the unlimited pow
of legislation; to the passage of all a,Us in the
most general accepation of the word which, by the
by, is carefully excluded from the sentence. And,
indeed, if this so, it would render unnecessary
Congress the power to legislate with the
Of the States, respectively, over all places purchased
for the erection of forts, magazines arsenas, dock
yards" &c. These being the "pr0perty" of the
United States, if the power make needful rules
and regulations concerning" them includes the gen.
eral power of legislation, then the grant of authority
regulate the territory and other property of the
United States - is unlimited, whichever subjects
found FORTS operation. and its exercise needed
auxiliary provision. If, the other hand, it does
include such power of Legislation over the other
clude it their territory % for the sans terms
which grant the-one grant the other. &c Territory"
is here classed with property, and treated such,
and the object evidently to enable the general
government, as property holder-which from neces-
SHY, 1t must be-to manage, preserve and dispose