Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1849-04-25
From the Souti'rn (Athens) Banner.
IMPORTATION OF SLAVES.

| hurtlifn ui The Southern press, 0l Inc enact-
menl aud rigid enforcement, hy The more
! Suulhern Staes nf !,ruhihitory laws against
The introduction Of SLAVES in the border
STATES, aud thereby preventing them irom
! Joining the family ul free states.
We consider the hole Of the reasoning
no, only fa!acious, but il Tue proposed
| measure were carried OUT in practice. it
would play precisely into the hands Of
The aboliIionisls by con6nins the slave TO
the soil. aud producing the necessity for
emancipation, when il shall he exhau!'ed.
That contining the slave TO the soil. by
prohibiting. on the part of the federal gov.
ernmeni. the removal Of slaves from state
TO state is "a part Of a plan set on J foot by
the Abolhionisis. for tie purpose Of orsr'
ihrowing the institution o stauery in The
States" was usserled-and asserted truly
by the celebrated .itherion Resolutions, oi
which we all heard so much during The
last Presidential canvass. Every South.
ern man. not even excepting the support.
ers Of Miliidrd Fillmore. that ardent friend
of Southern institutions. was hot as pepper
a, The idea of The federal government al.
tempting 10 prohibit the removal of slaves
from slate 10 slate. and 90 hot did the pub.
lie indigna,inn wax upon this subject. that
The darling Vie President uf the Southern
Whigs came very near being wrecked in
their affections. by The vote he gave OH the
Atherion resolutions in favor of the pnwer
Of the government 10 prohibir such reno.
vnI. Nnthiug could Save him hut an open
reirari of that opininu, founded upon a
decision of Justice Mclean. Now. whilst
we grant that there is wide di.lncIion
in pninr Of Ihe"ry between The exercise Of
an unlawful pnw er by The federal govern
meet. aud ,ha, OF lawful une by the state
governments. yet for the life Of Us, we can
moi see why. il the prohibition "i The re-.
movaI Of slaves lrnn one state ~ nnn'her
is calculated 10 overthrow the institution
of slavery within the states. that result
should not as we'll happen under the exer.
else of The power hy the ono government
rs The other. Ii lhr Southern stales merely
meant that they would mol submit to hav.
ing their lhrnats cur BY the fanatics, in
tending to perfnrn ,hur delightful operation
themselves. then we have nothing 10 say
why they should not 60 righ, al it, as re-
commended.
We wish it explicitly understood that
we have nolhing To say in defence of the
morality ol' the slave Irale. prnperly speak
ing. We du not desire I" take off The
brand put upon il hy our legislature. Bnl
we think it would Ls very unwise to check,
in the least. tie emigration of rersons with
their slaves from stale To siaie for The pur.
noses of settlement. or The inlmduc,i0n ol
slaves from other states for the use Of the
purchaser.
There is q false ilea abroad in the com.
muni,y that prohibitory laws against The
) further inlroduciun of :his kind ofpr'per'y
in The stale, would make that which we
: have already in The state mole valuable
: So prevaIent is This suppnsiIun, that II is
=. -.!.-..-.7----.-Eprtiiri1a --li-nni Tho only
foundation for those laws. We find u
learned Judge tFI"!dl advancing i, upon
; he bench. and sustained in n recent article
of the Savannah Republic. n.
The value of labor. whriher free OF
slave. like commercial rcnlmodi'ies. de
pends upon The supply and demand. The
demand for slave ldhur if unrestricted hy
nun.mporaIinn laws ir The states, is a.
wide as lhe i-li of culture for n,bacco
cotton. rice. sugar. and the tropical pro
huclinrs generally. LIT every slate pass
its non iinpnr'ainr. laws, and il becomes
restricted Ia 1he limits Of each. The Iup
plv ..f slave labor Las heen lessenrt!. tul
the demand also. Wha, dn y"u Gain by il.
should they keep al an evan rat
bui every one can see. that. if this res
,rirtire policy should he adopie.i. The de
manh would he currailed in far greater
rain than it present. hears To the surpIv.
We repea, "Let The thing alone" Your
pnlicy wonI.l lead 10 emancipation no, only
III The border slave states. hur in you, own.
~ no distant dag. You would cnnfine the
slave Ia the sniI. which hs will wear ou,
and reach The very end you are enhoavor.
ing :" avoid
We were very much pleased with the
first parr of an editorial of tho Augusta
Cons,irn.inna.is,. of The 9Th uIt.. on this
subject. The editor placed il upon its true
grounds. Labor is rs much al nrticls OF
commerce az everything else. II is bought
aud sold. We were. therefore,. grari6ed
To see him place it upon the ground Of
"free rrade.' We regret thai in subse-
auent part of the arri:le he saw sufficient
reason to take il from this basis. He thinks
The adoption Of non-impora,ipn laws ex.
tended even to purposes Of settlement"
would force the border states ,o sack an
ou,lel in California and New Mexico. IF
This argument does mt look TO mere tenn :.
porary restrictions. i, defeats ITSELF Iflhe
policy remains permanent among the
present slave holding states. We have
clnsed large market 10 open a smaller.
When that becomes supplied. and the soil
exhausted, as il must he. inevitably. by the
slave labor. we must emancipaIe or send
il off to countries. ou Of the Union. where
it may lie wanted. But has our friend Of
the Consti,uIionalst examined the process
by which this kind of labor is TO he trans
ferred to New Mexico and California =!
Does il not occur to him that il mnst pass
through the states where Tho re,tricrions
are ,o.he enforced against either sale or
oa a. o,l n - ,,..l L. L.