The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1850-02-26
rFor the Crescent. ]
The Slavery Question. Mol.

Tile poceT of Congress 10 obottsh Slavery in the
Disfict IF Colun15ie denied.
The matter Of this communication may partake
too much of politics to secure a place in your
columns but as its object is to arrive at the truth
of certain great political problems, in which the
South is deeply interested, irrespective of party
may indulge the hope that it will prove acceptable
The propositions presented for discussion are :
That Congress has no power to abolish slavery in
the District of Columbia, either upon the grounds
of expediency, or as an abstract right;
That the State Legislatures, in the States where
slavery is recognized by law cannot abolish it, un
less the Constitution Of such State expressly give
them the power
That no fundamental changes can be made by
any Legislative body, without changes having first
taken place in the fundamental, or organic law.
These are great principles, which seem to be i'm
perfectly understood even in the South, where they
must be invoked in order to preserve Constitu-
tional rights and privileges entire
In examining Mr. Clay's resolutions, | find that
he places the power of Congress to abolish slavery
in the District of Columbia upon the ground that
it would be inexpedient to do so while the State Of
Maryland continues to hold slaves. The PROPOSE
ton contained in the resolutions is very clear but
that it would be wrong, rather than inexpedient (?
To say that it is inexpedient, admits the power to
do and questions only the prudence of the exercise
of that power To say that it is wrong, denies the
right, and places the question upon higher ground
1t would be inexpedent for Congress to abolish
slavery in the District of Columbia upon other
grounds than those which are intmated by Mr. Clay
in his resolutions Congress is conlessedy the great
agent of protection to all the rights of property within
its jurisdiction The very nature ofits organization,
the peculiar principles and circumstances which
gave it existence, have indelibly impressed this
character upon it. The Constitution intends that
the rights Of property shall be sacred and secure
and has charged Congress with the custody of its
high purposes The issue presented to Congress
is that of moral opinion in the North insisting upon
the disturbance OF serious and subsisting right in
the South. The existence of slavery is no more an
evil, in its effects upon the North now than it was
when the Constitution was adopted nor is it less
| high aud important right in the stakeholder and
| freedom of opinion, OH this subject, is all that ths
| Constitution to the Moth. If they depre
cate the existence of slavery as a moral evil they
undoubtedly have the right to say so but if they
seek the action OF Congress the matter then become
POLITICAL and the Constitution does not uphold then
in a violation OF the rights of others. 1t would b.
inexpedcnt, then, admitting Congress holds tn
power, to sacrifice prominent interest of one por
tion to crafty the moral opinion of another.
| This power in Congress is based upon the conclu
sion that the Constitution does prohibit it, ant
| that in republican government majority rules
The objection to this position is, that the silence o
| the Constitution negatives the right The simpI,
| rules Of special agency, which involve the princi
pies of law and common sense, fully illustrate th,
subject. Congress is an agent; the Constitution is
the letter of procuralion and the silence of that
instrument upon the power of an agent, 10 perform
| any particular act, denies the power; and court
of law would hold the act to be nuiiy, in regard
to the principle, unless he had satisfied it.
The principle tina, majority governs comes Toe
late 1t should have been urged at the time of the
adoption of the Constitution. The attempt to striE
any portion Of this people of their properly rights
| should have been made when its resistance wou!J
| not have brought upon the county the terrors of
revolution and when the interested parties coul,
have saved themselves from the effects of this prin
ciple by refusing to become parties 10 the fedora
compact. Had this proposition been made to III,
people of the District of Columbia while they wer,
citizens of the State of Maryland, the suggestion
would have been Withdrawn, as Maryland woult
never have been member of this great coniedera
| cy. These are matters of common history ant
they operate the interpreters of agreements, bl
showing upon what parties the obligations of goot
faith rest. 1t is well known with what views all,
opinions the Southern States placed their grea
properly interests under the guardianship OF tn
Federal Constitution and that understanding, es
sentiaily repes the operation of the principle that
majority governs, or meets it at the threshold wit
preparations for violent resistance. Upon thi
ground it would be iuexpedent for Congress to at
tempt 10 abolish slavery in the District of Colum
bia; because, the exercise of sovereign powe
would destroy the effect of an agreement, havin
upon all parties the force Of law-and it could nc
be done without the most unhappy consequences
Mr. Clay puts the inexpediency upon differen
ground still, and holds, that as long as Marylan
| holds slaves, Congress should not interfere wit
the subject in the District of Columbia. The sam
course of reasoning will establish The propostiol
that it would be wrong in Congress TO do so, a
fully as it does that it would be inexpedient. Til
reasons which influenced Mr.. Clay's mind are ey
dent at glance, The most superficial history {
the relations between the District of Columbia an
the State of Maryland comprehends the whole sui
ject.
Maryland ceded portion of her territory to III
! Federal Government for the establishment of tn
Federal city. Upon that territory, prior to its ce.
sion, slavery recognized and protected by tn
fundamental law of the State. The Constitutio
of the United States also guaranteed to each slave
holding State and to the citizens of those State
their rights property in their slaves. This righ
like every other, was doubly protected by Stat
and a United States Constitution and, with il
constitutional securities, was vested in the ind
vidual citizens of that State as any other of thos
privileges, which make up the character of fre,
man, whose liberties are no longer at the mere
and caprice of any body of men not legally auth
rized and empowered to change the organic law
the land,
At the time OF the cession, the Federal Cover
ment received the ceded territory and its ctizel
under its jurisdiction without any stipulation var,
ing the rights which they possessed under Il
State Government. This was matter of nece
sty; for neither the State of Maryland, nor Il
. Federal Government, could enter into compa
which would operate as violation of the mo
sacred mmunities Of our institutions As we
. might it be eontended that political sovereignti,
: : are onnipotent and that an agreement betwee
them to take mans life would be morally al
politically right since life is no more sacred in Il