Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1849-07-02

bln tnaI prOposiIious '
and | do not change my opinions OF right
10 suit calculations or circumstances.
! What is more, never heard Of any body
that thought wrong thens and the only
Hdifference between my proposition and
Mr.. Calhoun's act, was, that was in fa-
vor of limiting slavery by line drawn
North and South, and that by negotiation
with the State 10 be effected. Mr.. Calhoun
divided the free and slave soil Of the State
itself by line drawn East and West, and
accordingly did so divide it; and the State
SO stands at this Gay. The difference be-
tween us was the difference between lon
Igitadinal and la&itadinals 2line, and between
taking the boundary Of a State upon nego.
tiation with her, for the boundary between
free and slave soil, and running the line
through the State itself.
1t is absurd to dsny to Congress the pow
er to legislate as it pleases upon the sub
ject of slavery in territories; it has exer-
cised the power, and with the sanction OF
all authorities, State and federal, from the
foundation to the present time, and had it
been questioned until Mr. Calhoun put forth
those unfortunate resolutions, from which
he had to back out under his own mortify-
ing contradictions. 1t is absurd to claim
it for the territories. They have no form
of government but that which Congress
gives them, and no legislative powers but
that which Congress allowes them. Con-
gress governs the territories as it pleases,
and in way Incompatible with the con-
stituton, and oflhis any State that has been
a territory is complete example, ard our
own as much as any.
Congress has the power to prohibit or
admit slavery, and no one else. 1t is not
in the territories; for their governments
are the creatures of c congress, and its dep
uties, so far as any legislative power is
concerned. 1t is not in the States sepe-
ratively : and leads to one Of the grossest
delusions which has grown out of the po-
litical metaphysics Of Mr.. Calhoun. He
claims right for the citizens of the slave
States to remove to New Mexico and Cali
lornia, with their slave property. This is
a profound error. Fhe property is in the
law which creates it, and the 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
a law Of that State an inch beyond the
boundary line Of the State which creates
it. The instant he passes that boundary,
to settle 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 all-wi,h the Northern man, with
his corporations and franchises-with the
Southern man and his slaves. This is the
law of tie land, and let any one try it that
disputes it. We, In Missouri, are we'll sit
uated 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 property-his slave
property. Let him remove to Iowa;
he will meet there the 9th section of the
act of Congress Of March 9th, 1720-the
Calhoun provisos and will in vain invoke
State rights and, Missouri statutes. Let
him remove to illinois; he will find there
the Jefferson proviso, in the form Of the Or
dinance of 1887. Let him remove to Ken.
lucky: the law Of Kentucky takes hold of
his slaves, 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 ssame footing as land, as
they are in Louisiana. Let him move in
to Arkansas; his chattel slave will remain
chattel, but by virtue Of Arkansas law, and
subject to its regulation. Finally, let him
remove w est, and settle in the territory
of Nebraska, when it shall be created; and
the Calhoun proviso will be on him again,
and his property will evaporate. Thus, a
citizen Of Missouri cannot get out Of his
own State, on any one of its fonr sid es,
with his slave property, without having its
character altered, Or holding it by another
law; and twice he will lose it-on two sides
Of his State, on contiguous territory-he
wifi lose it under an act of Congress, which
became law under the advice and opir-
ion Of Mr.. Calhoun, in his high character
Of cabinet minister, and assisting at coun-
Gil armed with the veto power. This is the
case of the Missouri citizen, and has been
ever since Missouri was State; and no
one ever thought the State soverei gnty in
suited, or felt himself bound to dissolve the
Union on account Of it.
1NO. Lu0 CltlLoilS VI IIl0 OLulGS Car.
ry 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 q code DIFF
ferent, in many respects, from each other;
and all to be exercised by the same judges,
in territories 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
# does so: but that is confined to States.
And now we arrive at substance-at q
practical point. Congress has the consti.
tutlonal, power to abolish slavery in terri
tories, but she has no slave territory in
which to exercise the power. We have no
territory but the remainder of Louisiana
North and West Of Missouri-that in Cal.
ifornia New Mexico and Oregon-and
that North of Wisconsin, nowMinesota.-
In Louisiana, North and West of US. i,
was abolished by Congress in 1920. In
the territory North of W isconsin, now Mi
nesota, it was abolished by tie jefferson
proviso Of 1857. In Oregon it was abol
ished by Congress in ls4s, by what yor
may call the Benton proviso if you please
In New Mexico and California twas abol
ished by the Mexican Congress in 1929