The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-03-24
CONGRESSIONAL.
srErOa or MIA. W. 4. aoRmAn,


Representatives, Tuesday. Mara IL. 1880.
Mr. GORMAN said:
Mr. CHARMAS: In proposing to offer my views to The
committee upon the subject under consideration, must
touch very briefly ns ss 70 'G Ss
dents message before Therefore, without fur,
thsr introduction, propose TO give The views q myself
10 represent need not remark that almost every State
in which African slavery Is tolerated as an institution
nss 81 her several and By
az their feelings and sentiments in primary meetings, that
the Congress Of the United States has constitutional
orTerrtories This fact is universally known through the
medium othe press These States have In the most solemn
manner, declared their determination never TO submit to
further aggression upon what they deem their constu
tiona rights. This leads me to inquire whether the in
siuton OF slavery exists in any Of the territory lately
and now hold that African slavery avoun
tay sevude, does not exist there In proof Of this posi-
ton, say, that when government acquires territory
main in full force. until they altered by the
reign Here admit II country IS discovered by the
people Of nation In this instance the laws Of the gov
eminent to which the dscoverer owes allegiance are
brought with them. and in force until they altered
by some other legitimate power.
"Isa settled principle in the law and usage Of nations
that the inhabantsot conquered territory change their
.gance and their relation 20 ,hei, former sovereign y
but hs ea o q each Shs and sss ,s sa.
Saeros, RENAL. I'M undis,urbeda4ss RoS. Rep. los,
h q Issssn sss. sn'''
Agsn "a the United States against Perche-
s.s.. Iss.G 8. Dep. iii; STROLLER y Iuos', i
Th: AVS asases. and municipal regulations, in force
me lime q The Conquest csssion remain force until
ss.nsss y n asS s
"a, 74s, 10; STROLLER "a. Lucas, ~ Peters, 4io.
change dc law. q conquered osded country by
But the sovereignty Of the American States rests in the
people, and 10 promulgated through their representatives.
10 the executive Legislative, and judicial departments Of
the government and before the laws that BY the usage
they must Be- governed BY the laws in force Al The time Of
altered This principle was wen illustrated in New York.
Wendell R, Ss4, 5ss. When the English acquired the
possession Of New York BY force in 1854 the charter
sUs 4 a %
England should be the established laws Of the province
And this put end to the operation of the Roman Dutch
alluded TO- OF the sovereign power OF the conqueror
the laws Of the conquered countries. appear in the
q The northern who I The south Of
adopted their laws entirely retained those Of the
conquered countries to their full extent Sauignys HIS
tory Of ne Roman Ldw, Ooi. l.
Ths conquest Of Gibraltar, Trinidad CeyIon. the Cape
remain laws Of the conquering nation. in whole
oOnquerors-Nots 70 is Ksnts Com, p. U.s.
The next question be determined is. has African sa
very been aSSahed BY any legitimate act Ct the Mexican g.
~
cree Of 1925 second by the act Of the Mexican Con-
gress Of 1887 to which decree distinguished senator
from Texas [Mr RusKl has taken exception, not be-
ing legitimate This decree is as follows:
"Day l5-Dere Of the governmsnf virtue Of srtraor-
:.A5oatiOn Of slavery repsblic- Slavery abo
shed the republic 2 Consequently those free who,
until now, have been considered slaves g. When the
circumstances OF the treasury permit H. the owners OF
slaves shall be unidentified in tho prescribed by the
laws.
.Ths decree Of the 18th September 1922 gave liberty
the slaves then in the republic with indemnify their
that property nigh. not seem 70 be
published on the abolition Of slavery"
He assumes that they have no binding force because
they were promulgated while the government was in a
state OF revolution, and by dictator.
This might have some force, il were not for the act
of the Mexican Congress, acting within their legitimate
1899 II even this act of the Mexican Congress had not
been fully legitimate, all doubt must be dsspated, when
the constitution of is43 absolutely abolished slavery
the following extract will prove:
"No slave In the territory OF the nation, and any
introduced shall be considered free and shall be under the
The two preceding propositions being affirmed by most
Of the free States and denied by part Of the South both
srctions and ought TO settle this vexed question Of
aavery by the old, time honored doctrine oil the demo-
cratic republican parynon intervention; and should
savehslder emigrae to this territory any part of IT,
affirm that he will find, staring him in the face, the
laws in force prohibiting slavery. Then we have
constitutional tribunal TO test the legal question:
which will necessarily then arise whether his negro
10 bondsman freemani Here, then, present
peaceable constitutional remedy for both the North and
The South, without resorting to dissolution prohibit
ton. Will the South accept this non-intervention
PLATFORM Will the North accept this constitutional
and peaceable platform Will the South trust the
Supreme Court Will the North trust the Su-
peme Courti II they will, this question be settled
in peace and concord. The legal minds OF the South
must have been strongly impressed with the belief that
slavery did not exist there under by authority of law
therefore has been that this species Of property has not
been taken there, general thing, by the southern
people.
now propose to inquire, whether Shareholder would
venture TO take his slave there property II citi-
zen OF Georgia proposes TO emigrate 10 Louisiana,
the first inquiry would naturally be, " Can hold my
slaves property by the municipal laws OF that State p
He 70 answered, Yes. But suppose there is also law
upon the statute books OF Louisiana which declares that
all negroes-save chdren-born after the year 1852,
should be free / ask the honorable gentleman from
Georgia IMr TooMBsl II he could evade the force Of that
law, by declaring that the constitution OF the United
States recognised the institution existing in Georgia
therefore, he had vested right his slave as property
and being the OF the mother that he bad right
70 the offspring, and that municipal law could deprive
him Of presume as lawyer he would not hesitate
10 say that he must submit himself and his property 10
the laws Of Louisiana ask him whether the municipal
law Of . territory has not the binding force upon
the inhabitants as il has In a State!
Now, Mr.. Chairman, propose TO make brief
reply to many assaults which have lately been made
upon the democratic party. The honorable gen.
tlemsn from Georgia [Mr. TooMBsl has charged
upon the democratic party, North and South, that,
BY their united efforts, they acquired Texas, the re-
occupation Of Oregon, California, and New Mexico; that
Tor his part he bad but record--and that was
nrn a. IT, 4 al~n Ill