The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1850-10-29

sy- The steamer Robert Martin, says Jeems, is
expected monthly.
Was it Right for Congress to pass the Texas
Bill, the California Bill, etc.
Brother Fulton, Of the Wadesborough IN. c.
Argus, "cannot see where Congress has assumed d
any arbitrary power" in these matters, and as he
expects to end his days in tina, beautiful portion
of the Union, he, brother Fulton, don'tiike to be
told by every Tom, Dick and Harry that southern
people (such as he is) are the slaves Of the North,
&C. &c. Now, brother Fulton, if you never hear
ANYTHING worse than this, consider yourselfa lucky
man. Your late attempt to ridicule one of our ed
iorios is decidedly puny. There are some peo-
pie IN the world WHO arA L~r-ll! fir ryrIr ITO watch
geese on common unless they are themselves
uatched. Were you "vountarily to assume the
task" committee of Vigilance might be necessa-
nv. But let US cease these offensive personalities
which can neither afford amusement or interest 10
our readers or ourselves-et us come down to
our work as "practical, busness-like Editors"-let
lis lose sight of men and consider meaSures-upon
these grounds we are willing TO meet you at pas
sage-ill-arns, as toeman worthy our steel, "wth
our lance couched and not feather quiverng in
our plume" here we 60.
Congress had no right to pass such bills as have
been carried looming through both houses. You
call for proof as if we had none. You ask our
reasons for saying that Congress had no right to
pass those bills. You regard our remarks as mere
assertion without shadow Of proof The truth is,
we regard it as selEevident proposition not even
needing The shado'o Of proof Yet as there are
good many different opinions in the world, and as
you seem so thoroughly welded to your own, we
have 10 objection to submitting for your especial
benefit, few items Of facts, which are said some
times to be stubborn things. We take Pats way
of answering you, by submitting the following in
terrogatores First. Was the letter and spirit of
the constitution of the federal government carried
out in the admission of California, or in the pas
sage of Pearce's bill. Did Congress, in the adms-
sion Of Ca Iiiornia as State in the Union, observe
the precedents regulating the admission of States
heretofore. Was territorial government at any
time prior TO its admission as State, provided
for it, as was done in the cases of the other
States applying for admission in the Union, sue
ccedng the establishing of the federal compact
Was census taken by and under the direction
of the Congress of the United States before her
admission, 10 ascertain if the required number OF
inhabitants were there, to entitle her, all things
else being done constitutonally and in order, to
admission. To these points we say that Congress
observed none Of these things.
Please inform us, brother Fulton, why it was
that Congress refused for two years to give Cali
forna territorial government! And We ask you
to answer why it was that those very members Of
Congress who opposed California having terri
torial government when no slavery restrictions
were offered, afterwards voted for her admission
as State when these restrictions were incorpor-
ated? Do you suppose, or can any reasonable
man with common sense suppose for moment,
that the bill which passed Congress for the admis-
sion of California, would ever have passed, if the
slavery restrictions were left out? Had it been a
slave State, is there the slightest possibility that it
would have been received.
What guarantee havei either OF U.s. that those
certain unalienable rights, among which are life,
liberty aud the pursuit Of happiness, declared in
the grea. magma charta of American liberty, may
ever be claimed by us in any part of this vast do
main? Is there spot in all the FIVE hundfed
thousand square miles of California upon which
WE can stand and say, HERE wEMAY REST SECURE
WITH orR PROPERTY! Can We take slave there