The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-07-19

technical term in the law of nations, and is often
used in extradition treaties II is twice used in
the ConstitutiOn-Once in relation to fugitives
from justice, and once in relation to fugitives
from labor. In its technical meaning, it imposes
an obligation on the State in which the fugitive
is found, to take active measures for his redo.
livery TO his owner; or il fugitive from justice
to the State having jurisdiction Of the crime fol
which he fed Up to the time Of the Missouri
Compromise, nearly all the Northern States had
passed laws to carry out in good faith, this pro-
vision of the Constitution, and the fugitive from
labor was provided for in the same statutes
which provided for the delivery up Of fngitives
from justice. But a. the seheme of abolition
advanced towards the ends to be accomplished,
another policy was adopted. These statutes
We're repealed. and large majority of the
Northern States have since passed laws to pre-
vent the re-deliyery Of fuQitiyes from service.
This 10 the abolition policy, to which the States
of the North are committed by the acts of their
legislatures, in open violation Of the Constitution
Irepeat, that design is now avowed to re-
strict slavery to its present limits, with the view
to its final abolition in the States. To show
that proofs are abundant upon this subject, call
the attention Of the committee to a speech late
| ly delivered here, by member from Pemsylva.
mia, MI. STEVENS. He irstquotes from speech
| of Mr. MEADE, Of Virginia. . IL" said Mr..
MEADE, 1--WE intend to submit to the policy OF
combining the slaves within their present limits,
we should commence forthwith the work of
gradual emancipation. It is an easier task for
us than for our children" The member next
repeats remark from the speech of Mr.. HrL-
LARD, of Alabama sWe must" said Mr.. Hill
LARD, snake up our minds to resist the inter
diction of the progress of slavery, or to submit
to an organic change in our institutions" In
reply to these remarks of Mr.. MEADE and Mr..
HMLIARD, the member from Pennsylvania ex-
ultingly exclaims: at4 stf
ayes, sir; this admitted result ia, to nv mind
one of the most agreeable consequences of the
legitimate restriction of slavery Confne this
malady within its present limits, surround it by
a Gordon Of freemen that it cannot spread, and
in less than twenty-five years, every slavehold-
ing State in this Union will have on it's statute
books law for the gradual and final extinction
of slavery. Then will have been consumated the
fondest wishes of every patriots heart. Then
to pOsterity bright example Of the true princi-
ples:.of government universal freedom. X
II am opposed to the extension Of slavery in
to territories now free, for still greater rea-
SONS, because | am opposed to despotism
throughout the world. admit that this Gov
eminent cannot preach a crusade of liberty into
other States and nations; much rs abe abhors
tyrants and tyranny, there she can only mourn
over it's existence. But when the question of
government is within her own control, and she
permits despotism to exist, and aids it's dif{Gu-
sion, she is responsible for it in the face of the
civilized world, and before the God of Liberty
In these sentiments, often repeated here, the
end and aim of all this slavery restriction, this
Free-soil and Abolition agitation, may be clear
lily seen. The member from Pennsylvania sends
forth the rallying cry to the Abolition legions Of
the North, to press forward to the accomplish.
ment of this great scheme Of slavery restriction
with view to its final abolitioH in the States
Surround them with Gordon of freemen," says
he, $50 that slavery cannot spread, and in less
| than twenty-five years every slaveholding State
| In this Union will have on it's statute books a
law for the gradual and final extinction of sla-
very" 'i
Sir, this avowal of the ultimate design of the
Free-soil scheme, does not disclose to me any
new phase, in the controversy between the
North and South. have heretofore warned
the majority of the North, to accomplish the
end announced by the member from Pennsylva-
4 mia; that is, to surround the slave States by q
Gordon Of free States-t0 c0nfine them to their
4 present limits; and more still, to circumscribe
these limits, by driving in the outposts Of sla.
very, in the border States, with the view to the
final abolition of slavery, and until the South
hemmed in on all sides, Is reduced TO the cOndi.
ton now exhibited by St Domingo. This is
the Abolition scheme, of which nOn-extension is
but the means to accomplish the end. Roa Il
To obtain the control Of every department of
the Government, to enable them to effect their
designs it was first necessary to provide for the
united action of a majority in both Houses Of
Congress, and to elect President who would
repudiate the veto power. Both these prelimi-
nary steps have been accomplished. Gradually
the work Of uniting all parties at the North, up
to well-defned geographical line, has been go
ing on. Any public functionary who dared to
accord justice to the South, soon found a POI
litical grave. Ex-Presidcnts have entered the
lists Of Free-soil, and contended for the prize
offered by the inscriptions upon its banner, rs
did the kings Of the East in the Olympic games.
Down with slavery, was the battle-cry, which
has rallied the lcgions Of these crusaders. True,
they march to the field Of action under banners
slightly differing in device, but when once there,
Wing, Democrat, Abolitionist and Free-soiler,
Al untUc lHl OJlc EIdIu army lOI VIC OVoItiifOW
of slavery. Every aspirant for political honors,
has learned that, TO denounce the South, and
preach deliverance to the slave, is the only road
to political distinction. And however much the
different organizations Of party may differ on
minor questions of public policy, upon non-ex-
tension, they all agree. On this subject there is
but one party and one policy. As far, therefore
as this question is concerned, how does the
Northern Wing differ from the Northern Demo
crat, or how does the Free-soiler and Abolition
LIST differ from either? Do not all give their aid
to the great scheme of ultimate abolition, by
pressing forward the scheme Of non-extension!
Did not all vote for the Wilmot Proviso, with
three or four exceptions, while it was practi-
cal question! Are not all now in favor Of the
admission of California, and that, too, for the
reason that the Wilmot Proviso Is ingrafted in,
and constitutes 2 part of her so-called funda-
mental law, and that her admission into the
Union thus becomes part of the scheme Of
and therefore of ultimate aboli-
tion9 And what il IL worth to us, il some do |