The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-14

Illinois, that u was under government distinct and
tionay war; IL eowqv0sd BY ihs Of HUswia bu
there has been exhibited evidence % show that s a
sassf that Great Britain after the treaty Of l76s. BY
which she obtained y ever changed the laws then existing
"a the province. have carefully examined the acs o
that disrief Of cosmtyy"
Now bear in mind this is the conquered territory oi
Virginia Had Virginia the right to take slaves into that
territory What says the court'
"Iihnk then. that is unds~ab that the laws as they
wne ~ M was Of Fa~e were the mnni
Here the court through three stages 10 eet a he
law. Well, sir, here is further dictum in this case,
From the facts authorities, and reasons advanced. these
were subject g such laws ss the conqueros chose I'M
e 1s - ss sass rs..a nss Il s
ha, the titles possessions, rights. and liberties guaran
ssss s;s s
Sir this decision grants that for which am contend
has right to take slaves into these new Territories not
withstandng the laws there prohibit slavery. Yet
SIR her own courts decide that she may not take them.
falls to the ground BY virtue Of her own Judicial auto
ties for this same case decides also that s c0sion
has nothing TO DO sciM the matter. The court says:
ton Of the United Stsses constittion o he UNI
ted States has nothing e do ssih The qusson
Mr. DAVIS, Of mississippi. 4 would remind the sem
ator from Wisconsin that we fall into greater error
than when we attempt 70 run parallel with diverging
lines; and consider that the senator has fallen into
similar mistake in citing the case 70 which he haa alluded
as bearing. upon the subject in hand He is surelya
lawyer, and one OF sufficient acuteness, would appear
to me- to distinguish between the decided ID Msss
slppi concerning The laws IN Virginia which he hss quo
in Virginia was where she had sovereignty before
the foundations Of the constitution were laid 34a
Mr.. WALKER The senator from Mississippi always
Mr. DAVIS, Of Mississippi. Because am very GER
'alu; ~ rrr - fss. Ftfe,
ways speaks so positively, and with air-I say IL
with no disrespect-which seems TO say nothing more
can be said". know it al"-" must Be as Think
slaves were taken to Indiana before the constellation was
adopted; but much the for the senator's logic.
Virginia was then slave country-the territory was
the ordinance Of 1857 vet in the way yet the
court Of the senator's State passes through the sovereign
y OF Virginia and England 10 that OF France, and de-
lies the answer to the senator nom South Carolina. Is
BUTLER, when he puts the case of Territory conquered
by nation Of slaveholders. Hla ~ @gaa
taken to Indiana, 1907 after the adoption Of the
constitution. will read it, appropriately bearing upon
the question before MS and think il knocks the very
sppi, lMr DAvIs] read from the case Of Rankin o.
Lydia. Marshalls kentucky Reps, p. 470s aasrs sA
Lydiawss born slave in Kentucky In the year 1906
removed hence in the year 1907 ths late Telr,oy d n
diana, where he setaed shortly alter the 7h Of September
be took with him. and whom he kept iii ths Sh o Decsm
ber IsiA when he sold his right Lydia in that Terri
sho Srossk her 20 Ks~isay and old hsi 70 John W Ran
holds and claims her as slave for is she being person
soSE % be having vim had anowcds when he her
On this state Of the case the court says he issue bsng
on the freedom OF Lydia y s.ras5
'n deciding this question we dsc.Im The inaaenos of
ss bs a. ~ and
as ought 70 be- Slavery sanctioned by the laws Of this
uaiions Is unqnssonable. But view this right
existing by positive law Of mwsicpa (atk yo, not
iare, the unwrrisn and common law II. BY the pos-
tive provisions In code, we can and must hold
siss Ssea. "a a sss%" 'd. si right Il *. oh%. s~d Srs s
slave. m must ey an asAorfy equally impsr0ss ~ M
In this case, sir, il will be found that the slaves were
taken the Indiana Territory under local las1 permitting
and yet the court decides that the slaves became free
Il is true the court decides they became free BY virtue Of
the ordinance OF 1857 but that nothing more than
local law for the Territory, forbiddtng dapry Now
it, coniended here, the constitution makes slaverya
institution, have ovedden the local law
OF the Territory, il is contended does the local
law OF California and New Mexico. But the court de-
cided oherwise and so il would in the present case
for have certainly shown that IN California and New
Mexico there is quite as strong local law against sa-
claimed, Mr. President that the slave laws Of the
United States are Of political charac,sr All the slave
10 the constitution. Now. in what respects are h<y
foundi Certainly in but three One 10, that provision
in the constitution which regulates the computation or
enumeration OF the people as basis OF representation
Now, sir, when is that provision OF the consttuton
fulfledi Why, when we include three. .fyfhs Of Ae
saue population IN firing basis for Representations But
again. in regard 10 direct taxation: how Is that fulfilled
Why Of course, by enumerang three-fths Of the save
population. forming basis OF appoopmen OF taxes,
when shall resort TO direct taxation. Here the opera-
ton OF the constitution ends as well a. our duty under
Il in this respect The oher provision s 10 regard 70
fugitive slaves This 10 fulfilled whenever the States (or
Congress) make provision for the extradiiion OF fn-
gves Here TOO. the operation oil the constitution ends
in this particular. well duty under what
there in either OF these provisions all togeihes which
gives this institution Of slavery any of the features o
political law OF this countyi Nothing Under our a.
legiance we bound only to the enumeratons have
mentioned, and to the enactment OF exuadiuon iawe
Here our oahs and allegiance to slavery end ths
our allegiance 10 the constitution binds us TO DO but
sir does il consequently follow that because we fulhl
these obligations OF the constitution throughout our
Union in conformity with our oaihs, allegiance also
binds US to suffer slavery to override not only the laws o.
Mexico existing in these Territories, and plant itseif
where Il does not exist but also the power OF tns
eminent to prevent in Unless this be So slavery no
more pol,fieai institution than navy yard. We have
duties 10 perform to both but we are no more bound TO
The one than the other 10 spread IL or 70 sniIer u to
spread itself everywhere in newly acquired territory
We fulfil our duty to this Union and to slavery In the
particulars have mentioned tt
we have nothing further incumbent upon us 10 per.
form in relation 10 the subject II the constitution re-
aures OF the performance Of any other duty slavery
Il IA 10 dscountenance IT which view il developed in
decision made in Louisiana. will read an extract from
the decision which declares IL II Martins Louisiana Re-