Southern patriot. (Houston, Chickasaw County, Miss.) 18??-18??, 1849-09-12

IN inevitable tendency % diminish
he happiness Of the people. and en-.
hanger the permanency oil the Union.
md ought not 10 be counionanoed ~
NV friend OF our political institu-
lions.
address myselfto Ceeilemen some
ofwhom participated in The dellber-
atoms or that Convention and united
in the ailirmanco OF these resolutions
all of whom are "friends 20 our po-
litical institutions Il appeal to them
TO saw If this bin. which inhibiis
slavery in one Of the Territories Of
this Union, is consistent with that
resolution. Task them if il is not an
"interlereuce with the question OF
SLAYER" Ill it is not at least an ''in-
cipent step in relation therefor and
then enquire II as friends 10 orr
political institutions, they will lead
themselves to a measure which they
themselves have recently and pnb.
licIy declared to be calculated TO
lead to the most alarming and dam
gerous Consequences" TO shave an
inevitable tendency TO diminish tho
happiness Of the people and endanger
the permanence Of the Union?"
However we may differ on other sub
fleets I offer them my adhesion 10
this.principle Of Democratic faith, and
pray them to adhere TO ii. With the
privilege Of those who belong to a
common faith, lwaru them against
an Interference with the question Of
slavery, BY taking even an incipient
step IN relation to It. =
Can more eonlusive evidence Of
their opposition be furnished than is
presented to the reader in the above
extractsl
These great constitutional States
men very PROPERLY saw the unavoid.
allie and inextricable difficulties into
which they would preeipiiate them
Sc Ives and their constituents By
asking Congress 10 pass law to pro
tect our citizens in California New
Mexico, Oregon or any other place
in the enjoyment Of their property.
They saw that to ask Congress to
legislate at all on the slavery ques-
ten, would be yielding the constitu,
tional question upon which rested
their profound arguments against tho
interference Of Congress upon the
subject Nothing can be clearer Il
Congress has the power to say that
slavery shall exist in California, il
certainly has the power to say that
it shall not exist there lfit has tho
power to protect the slave holder, it
certainly has the power not to protect
the slave holder. The source that
would confer the one power on Con
gress, would most clearly confer the
other. Yielding the power TO legis-
late on this subject we yield our only
constitutional defense against tho
passage of the Wilmot Proviso. We
yield the sheet anchor Of our saliva
ton and cast ourselves upon tho tur.
bulent waves Of fonatieism, like tho
mariner without a compass, upon
tempest tossed ocean.
Mr. Harris's doctrine carried out,
will inevitably leave us in this dan
gerous position. What would De tho
caption Of Bill, he would introduce
into Congress for oUr protection? In
his own language it wonld be "a Bill
to protect the slave holder in the en-
Goyment Of his property, in Coliror
Inia. What would be the caption Of
a Bill introduced by a Free soiler.
(Mr. Giddings if the reader pleasas,)
TO prohibit slavery in the territories?
1t would doubtless be "a Bill to pro
hibit the introduction Of slaves into
California, orr Bill providing that
there shall be no slavery in the terri>
torids " How could The Freesoiler
accomplish bis object as expressed a
bovef Byannexing the penalty to
his BILL Withdrawing tho constitution
al protection already, granted, to the
Shareholder from him e, enacting a
law that all persons should be free IN
the territories-that there should De