Daily Richmond times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1849-1850, 1850-03-13
RESPONSES TO MIR. WEBSTER.

sent forth from the Senate Chambers the next OBJ
ject of interest is to know the responses which are
reverberated from the organs of public opinion
Our readers will doubtless, therefore, prefer see
ing the commentaries Of distant journals upon the
speech, to any remarks of ours, on the prevailing
theme of the day.
We begin then with the ~ Y. Tribune
journal more prominent than any other in the
North, not avowedly devoted to the Abolition
cause, for its hostility to slavery. Welooked with
some curiosity to see how Horace Greeley would
receive Mr. Webster's conservative views and
we are not surprised that he meets them with un-
compromising condemnation:
eve do criticise says the Trbune the manner of
Mr. Websteps speech do not find fault with its de-
tails all that is OF minor consequence. 1t is its sub
stance that we pronounce unequal to the occasion and
unworthy ofits author.
" 1t does not do all that slavery has been beseechng
OF Mr.. Webster Idoes profess to offer sc deg 80
mln., nor any minor compromise between slavery
tension and freedom; but it offers one, notwithstanding
1t takes the ground OF Senator Bell of Tennessee 1t
proposes not directly but indirectly, to balance Calfor-
MIA with new slave State taken from Texas, and to
abandon the Provso Tor the Territories"
In reference to Mr.. Webster's argument. that
slavery is prohibited in California and New Mexi-
CO by the enactment of God, the Tribune says:
SIT is absurd to say that slavery knows any mita-
tons OF climate, or SOIL occupation. 1t goes where
yer 1t can be made profitable II the law guaranteed
slave property In California can any who knows
enough to count four fail that thousands ofslaves
would in two months be digging gold therel Besides
slavery is not mere industrial institution in this coun
try and does dependtor its existence upon its profits
alone. 1t is great political machine, whereby the mi
norlty IN the Republic has long ruled the majority
That's why ii is adhered to with such tanatca persist
That is why in Kentucky, for example it resi.ts
every consideration which interest and sound reason
| . pnf ftahl 49,
remains notwithstanding So it would have got into
California, had it dared go here so it will now occupy
New Mexico, unless it is restrained"
On the fugitive slave question, the Tribune ut
tiers these atracious sentiments:
The position that Northern States and their citizens
are morally bound to recaptue fugitive slaves NAV be
good for lawyer, but is not good for a man The
provision is on the face of the Constitution True but
that does not make it the duty of Mr. Webster nor anv
other human being, when a painting fugitive presents
himself at his door begging for shelter and the means of
escape to arrest and bind him and hand him over to the
pursuefs, who are hot upon his trail In this the Con-
sutlon does not enact the will OF Satan and 40 NIL
gaory among reemen, though you enforce with all
possible statutes and penalties. When the public
sentiment gets ahead Of law that law loses all eff
Cheney" ~
The article is concluded with refusal to assent to
any compromise that peris or looks towards perjpa
freedom in New Mexico" and for the reason that the
tribune thinks the Union not and cannot be- in dan
ger, and can never be dissolved Nothing is said bv
the Tribune with particular referenceto the division Of
Texas.
The Ne'o York ErpreSs considering i" the three
points IN Mr.. Websters position" viz the surrender
OF the " Wlmot Proviso the right of the South to
recover fugitive slaves, and the warrant to the South
given by Congress- in the act for the admission of Texas
to the addition of four Slave States speaks as follows
OF the first and second:
The surrender of"the Proviso" being a thing of form
and not OF su6stance-Caiforna seeking her admission
under Tree Constituon-and that question occunvno
an entirely different ground from what it did DURING the
last Congress- we do not think there ought to be anv
n s as to the duty of Congress in the matter
lhe State oil California ought to be admitted as she ;s
IN her own right, and with her Constitution
we are led also TO believe that with the double
guard OF the non-existence OF slavery in the territory
acquired from Mexico, in the continued prevalence of
the antl-slavery laws of Mexico over this territory
winch must continue in force until slavery is re-estab-
cd tnee' either by Congress or by the peope0 in the
aversion OF the people to the Institution of slavery and
more than all IN the natural prohibition incident 10 soil
ana climate, slavery can never find foothold in the
territories Therefore, let the Proviso go. 1t will
poth prove useless and offensive circumference to the
California bill, andno bill can become law with such
provision Incorporated in it, nor any Territorial
bill pass Congress which may be thus encumbered -
Those who prefer to see California admitted as State
and New Mexico Incorporated with territorial form Of
government must yield the illusion to the substantial
good.
In regard the surrender Of fugitive slaves 10, the
General Government act, is bound to do under the
Federal Constitution The State Governments cannot
lntepose any obstruction to such exercise of Fedora
authorty,nor would have them do so but as This
demand is one OF the most epugnant to the people of
the Worm, II cannot be supposed that any thing beyond
acquiescence Will be advocated by people. The State
othcers are no where required in the Constitution to inter-
pose the gIs OF State authority secure the return of
slaves escaping from one State into another. We are
however, bound to acknowledge what the Constituon
does require, and good faith 10 act I'D TO those rem
sitions and IN this we ready endorse the posi-
tons of Mr.. Webster ~ F
No ,,o. o.
Constitutional provision. If it be said the States must
help, we answer that the Supreme Court has de-
CARED Their laws are void upon the subject as are all
laws too tor that natter and upon the ground that the
Constitution executes itself regard to fugitive slaves
Theoretically may, but practically it does not and
we appfeaena there will always be difficulty in this
matter until some action devised by which the master
proves before some Federal or other Court that the
person ne CLAIMS as his slave is reality But what
eesl may DC me practice do not let deny the binding
effect OF the Constitution or fail to hos
who would interpose mob violence and legal onihhIss
TO make il OF non-efiect" ~ @ doDie'
In regard TO the division of Texas into several slave
STATES he Express admits that 1T is so nominated in
The bond, but with strange obliquity Of moral per
cepuoh seems 10 think that those who opposed the an
nexaton OF Texas absolved from tu6lljnr the obl;
cation. AS well might those who opposed the treaty
with Mexico refuse to vote for paying her the fifteen
millions.
eve confess ourselves (he Express says startled bv
the proposition and by the strong light in which it is mt
by Mr. Websters argument-but we are lot convinced
nor can we be, until the South shows some better oh,
seIyanee than we have yet SEEN of living up to the Con.
sutuuon and the spirit OF compromise in which it was
framed II 1t exacts the pound Of flesh from the North
II must take care that not drop of Christian blood
Dc shed IN executing the bond. Mr.. Calhoun wants
secuona amendment to the Constitutions score more
Ganl tne e-eaacment of the Missouri line of SO 3d.
Othefs resist the admission Of California at all as free
State,-and if we not to be overwhelmed in the de-
uge OF waters flowing 10 from the South, we must now
6leasi lhe tde and demand something of practical
HRn' ID DehaH oil lhe people OF the free States
This we suppose, means that the North must insist
on the admission OF California before it will consent TO
observe the plghted faith OF the Government
The Neio York San, paper representing =, Ioro.
class OF readers in New York city, saws Of Mr. WI
s,er- 0o-