The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1849-06-23
After some particular notice of the Mis-.

I Alter some particular notlce OF the MIS-
souri, resolutions, Col. B. comes to the
main point, in which he declares it is alb.
surd to deny to Congress the power to leg.
islate as it pleases upon the subject oi
slavery in the territories-that it is absurd
to claim it for the territories. They have
no form of government but that which
Congress allows them. Congress governs
the territory as it pleases, and in way
incompatible with the constitution, and ol
this any State that has been territory is
a complete example, and Missouri as much
as any.
Congress has the power to prohibit or
admit slavery, and no one else. 1t is moi
in the territories; for their governments
are the creatures of Congress, and its de-
puties, so far as any Legislative power is
concerned. 1t is not in the States sepa-
rately.
He then proceeds to remark on what he
calls the gross delusion which has grown
out of the political metaphysics of Mr.. Cal
houn, that citizens Of a slave State have
the right to remove with their slave proper.
ty into New Mexico and California
There is nothing new in this part of Col.
Benton's argument. 1t is simply that pro-
perty is in the law that creates it, and that
the law cannot be carried an inch beyond
the State that enacts it, and that if differ
ent rule prevailed there would be confu.
sion of laws in the new territories. No
Judge could execute them. "No!" says
Col. B.
"The citizens of the States cannot carry
the laws of their States with them to Ore
gon and California; and if they could
what Babel of slave law would be there!
Fourteen States, each carrying 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. It would
be in vain to invoke the Constitution, and
say it acknowledges property in slaves
1t does so: but that is confined to States" {"
The next is what he calls a practical
point, and that is that Congress has the
constitutional poacer TO abolish slavery in
the territories; but she has no slave terri
, tory in which to exercise the power. We
have no territory, he says, but the remand
er of Louisiana north and west of Missouri
that in California, New Mexico, and
Oregon-and that north of Wisconsin.
now Minnesota. In Louisiana, north and
west of us, it was abolished by Congress
in 1920. In the territory north of Wis
consin, now Minnesota, it was abolished by
the Jefferson proviso of 1887. In Oregon
it was abolished by Congress in 1848, by
what you may call the Benton provso, if
you please. In New Mexico and Califor-
mia it was abolished by the Mexican gov
erment in 1929, confirmed in 1897, and
again in 1874.
After giving copies of the decree of the
Mexican government Of 1929, and the law
of 1887, he adds:
"This is the decree, and this is the act
ofCongress confirming it, aboishing slave
ry throughout the MvAioan republic. Ti,o
constitution of 1914, does not abolish slave
ry, for that was done before. but prohibits
its future establishment. Thus, there is
no slavery now in Mexico and California;
and consequently none in any territory
belonging to the United States; and, con-
sequently, nothing practical or real in the
whole slavery question, for the people of
the United States to quarrel about. There
is no slavery now by law in any territory;
and it cannot get there by law, except by
act of Congress; and no such act will be
passed, or even asked for. The dogma of
no power in Congress to legislate upon
slavery, kills that pretension. No legal
establishment of slavery in California and
New Mexico is then to be looked for
That is certain. Equally certain it will
never be established in either of them in
point of fact. The people of both terrific
ries-the old inhabitants-are unanimous
ly against it.
'Of the new emigrants, all those from
Europe, Asia, Mexico, Central and South
America, and all those from the non-slave.
holding part of the United States, will be
unanimously against it. There remains,
then, to overbalance all this unanimous
mass, only the emigrants from the slave
holding parts of the United States--in it.
self the smallest branch of the emigration,
and it divided on the question--many 60
ing for the express purpose of getting rid
of slavery-and very few so far in love
with it as to 60 that distance for the pleas.
ure of having law suit with his own ne
gro, and with the certainty of coming out
second best in the contest. There is, then,
no slavery at this time, either in New
Mexico or California, in law or in fact;
and will never be, either in law or in fact.
What, then, is all the present uproar about!
Abstraction! the abstract right of doing
what cannot be done! the insult to the
sovereignty of the States, where there is
no insult! all abstraction! and no reality,
substance or practice in it.
"The Romans had a class of disputes
which they called de lana caprina-that
is to say, about goats wool; and, as the
goat has no wool, the dispute was about
nothing. So it is Of this dispute among
us about excluding slavery from New