Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1850-05-10
: ..,,n,.,,,,.I-, Save QUESTIONS.
rrcuor Ma ). MlLLsoH, OF VIRGINIA,
Il THE HorsE OK REPRESENTATIVES,,
February 2lSi ana 2blt lS30.

~ February 2l<i ami 10Th, ls5U.
IcoScLUpED.
~ .cesdeJ MI Chairman as | trust | have in
Lowng that the Constitution controls all TIE agents W ,i
Cycrnmnt established by it, wherever they may oem"
,h,r in the States in the Territories at home or -
ocsed 10 consider whether SLAYER. IS promoted III ms
ha Or where else hy force OF any OF al i ~ y in
Does it proprio ricore exclude pr"h3!t or "T how
pny p2aepr country, SUBJECT to ITS operation" wbat clause
forsecod will il be found! ltis not Tor me 10 nc,nbent
The CONSTITUTION works no such results. IL l. i.ie ,a
n ,hnso rho h,d The affirmative side OF the argument ~
hin, out where and how slavery is prohibited =! ,nned
/Htuon But let ask how II was ,a c,,is;tion from
80 ad Snan ii he Constitution o! It's own Pi"Po ~,
force, sboishes prohibits II i,once yas secured by
e go V &C. ,oa,y could have any validity that wac r
d in contravention of the Constitution ' hv not in the
aboshed in the Disfe; OF h rrsIrcci The Con
S,ates-if the position am assains pe If The land
niion Of the United is the supreme Jaw ,;,on
Fand no State could maintain Tor IN .'is''''' "
thar was prohibited by that instrument. :, concluding
,hint Mr. Chairman that am llsiiita III @ -, N"
hs if slavery be prohibited in California =, h i;nited
mere force and operation of the Coistl'u - c,nnn,ss
So, Pm, i il prohibited there BY any acI o ro ne
II so show il to me. When WAS II passed M aen,e
provisions! But this will hardly ue c, II Congress
man viii no so bold a. maintain la any 49, IN e
has ever boen passed abo>hins prohibiting b the
territory acquired Mexico wheh ne ~; ,;',e hapilv
many efforts that have been niace-u' " ~ .r this very
uns,iccessful-to procure the passage "a So
purpose. ;., ue>ico recognizing
bu' was - y, hn ,yery Was prohibited in that terrific
rv1 shall not Mr. Chairman stop 70 ,m I,' ,,,aia
hive
t. 10 e,ora,rd simply deny that il contains any
such provision fany such exists &c, II Nc Of Congress or
j. not then by the Constitution ny amy ~ ~ Cai,or
- h Wcxican treaty that slavery Is prohol'eu ~
mis-, # j, he prohibited there at ALL lhefe Is on one
No. I. ~ which that territory Is supposed 'o W
sort 81 Jaw ~ INQUIRE whether slavery j. prohibited bv
,i,,t- mean what Is usually called me 'e'' "'' " " ~
visiting nj the time our title accrued ditch ,t
/ Know sir. that this Is the ground upon .'' h = -
, an me other side will ho disposed 10 rest the aISu
nent know, too that very many persons IN ''o so".'
.rtD mn
' So, md re,dy 10 resist the nsdtaed aggression "f he
NH entertain he opinion that slavery l. now ,"hip
81 institution in California and New Mc%co uhuei ''e -
lion of law not derived from the United states ana III
.p,nden, OF the Constitution and The mel oil ooi",eSs
With Great difference 10 these opinions os l'a - 10y
'' h rs -, some writers On national law and the ea
sopno of some of courts o justice on lls su'e't
b nosition assumed by those who MAINTAIN hat '.i! =
- nrohhitrd institution IN California, IS that the Next
.,n laws existing there the time OF lis conquest VI. -
-, nc,ss H., ACQUISITION hv treaty. continue unt
Ib.y are repealed annucd by some express ana POSI-
LEGISLATION: and that as slavery abolished ana ofV4e
h., Nascoit is uuw prohibited, because Inc hcA'. .I
.tl continues in force Sir, with all my respect !"i ny
@ ,h,;,ie ,ha, have assumed and announced ths posi-
ton take leave 10 say rha,, N my humhie uds"g,
a. erroneous ii is dangerous ae'' w. az! i:I
law is in force all in any territory beioh.'s ~ VIC
80 axnoo, he ndontion into code By The autho
rites Of our own Government having jurisdiction oel s
,hocr What sir have conquered these people oF gu!
orH only 10 be conquered III turn by heH d~'' - ol
control over the inhabitants less perfect now sJe ",
mas been declared, ami the country qn'uy s!ie.a'u
nm, .n,oy,nen than il when oGr possession was CON
rested and their submission involuntary Inc very pop
son involves confusion ri IDEAS sia'ed III ahout
frn its ncongruity just u apparen-ttsy t2fe '!"
To- gorern US tn are choose 10 gorcrn them i,
Let US examine the sources oil ms erroneous aoc
have said that il proceeds think from ansunderstana
ing OF the effect and meaning Of some oi on
d,e.on do no, mean attack these decisions but only
II explain them; though DO not wish TO be unoeftooc rs
,5ung that the reasons Given by judges Tor deciding a
cause in particular way, oi my sort VI ooisat"h upon
us except lr they bs commended 10 > oy 't
own intrinsic value Itir decisions a." binding
.uU!. t.,in IL
an end 10 the controversy winch we iher cary !" s''e'
but as for their reqsoaS ty aS ae just hat The! please
That Is a matter Tor themselves ea'ifciy.
There are two kinds law tv winch the American PEG,
ple a, governed u:lt by WHICH jhtr rights y; person ana
property ascesained and eent'e;- acss OF
DEGREES in which include c";Si's.'H "
Iaw--and the decisions Applications o! courts ahd
ridges In all controversies that arise i9r the ;uF-
pose ascertaning rights "f iedrcssinS "foh7s Mee
rule of decision Is prescribed b; legislative anthcI!-
" il must Of ceurs,. be respected, and carried iho
erect by the But where no such rae OF aeci.
sion is declared the ud decide all controversies that
are brourh, before them ccogn 10 their o"n views OF
Justice and right They have u: course, rules by Mhch
bed by the legislative power they ig adopted by then
selves or their predecessors ana their SIMPLE o3ecl 10 e
able them 70 ascertain a'4t ty o"PE 70 10 ji~ss ~
C,iorna at this time would probably decide iaosi eases
occurring there 10 which neither Tie Constitution no' any
The former Mexican provided existing right o! any
American citizen violated Why? Because he would
conceive TO be- Judges and pubcstshare correct
81 conceived be- Just and right TO decide them IN ac-
cordancc with the principles and rules OF action with when
The people were familiar and by which they had been
arcus,oneJ TO regulate heir intercourse There is
an,ccedent obligation decide them in this manner
He does it, because he and his predecessors have tcetd II
right ana proper do lie doe not administer The McN-
lean law 0rce, and Ha' be administered
is only the Judge himself that gives 'oce Is nor
the Mexican law consiran!ng the American Judge: but Tie
American Judge moulding the plastic customs o the country
applying hen when they fitted 10 the welfare Of Inc
people, and changing rejecting them when hey are not
So The very appeals which, prove .c opposite doctrine
are frequently made the decisions Of the Supreme
Court rather show that is 10 our tribunals look,
fba iuyx lcl1
in California must be regulated Had these decisions been
different from what they areiad they would have been d
if the judges had supposed 10 be right and proper 70
maze them sohad they declared that, IN no case should
regard be paid the former laws or customs oi aeA
cowhy 'hen all rights would be a,cetia,ned' rene
dies eniorceda controversies settled without any refer
Them at all And this proves, sr that u is ue
American court that gives life 10 the Mexican ia" ana
the Mexican law that controls an unwilling American
Sir this all tina, is meant IL the and by writers
national law when they ci Of the laws OF conquer
al country, continuing until others prescribed by the
conquero They continue ony because h. chooses 10 con-
nuc them They enforced only because his Judicial
tribunals choose enforce them IL l. upon this assent
this adoption that their force and validity depend and not
all upon their original enactment and pronunciation 10y
power which has ceased 80 exist. When they relate t. mat
.,s about which he i cdreisss ndfre hc VII IN
euge the conquered inhabitants, by settling the disputes
upon the principles which they accustomed When
they relate 10 things in concerning himself OF al
irc,ing his own wishes and interests lat VII! decide them ~
his own wishes and interests may prompt ThN beng uc
case how can il be said that the rights Of persons and pro-
perry of such citizens of the United States n may remove
this territory, for the purpose OF entering upon '
eno,incni of their conquest purchase VIII &c ana mSe
be decided by Inc tribunals established there by our own
Government not according 10 the uSagcs ana FllhcptS
prevailing in country, but Ivy those upon "ich
this newiy-acquircd community had been accustomed It"
settle their own disputes Hos" dare any court or Judge
decree that citizen Of Virginia shalt forfeit ms iiSh' o
property slave recognized and guaranteed by inc
Constitution and the laws ct the nited states, mercy oe
casc this conquered and subject people had once declared
when they competent 10 declare, that they thcm
selves would hold such property! deem il wholly TN
necessary TO push this argument further
Sir cannot but suspect that our opponents however
they NAV assal these conclusions really aware OF Their
force and uscc If they are not why did they oppose The
adoption Of the BILL generally known Us the compromise a
which was introduced into The Senate by Mr. CLAYTON, and
after il had passed that body defeated IN the House III
most exclusively bv the Northern yott Thai bill conferred
no nyileIe upon us: demand II did not propose
10 establish slavery this rertov ask no such 'hng
H. object submit existing rights 10 the aueca
lion ri The courts Lave leave things IL found tclr
10 retain such rights under the Constitution, we now pos
cess not TO confer that We do not now enjoy
The North would consent 10 this. Why, sr except
that their aim and is abolish slavery where II nov eA
ISL and not merely prevent is introduction ino terrific
~ where il is already prohibited Orr position Is alr, Jus
npecnable We seek maintain things rs they are-to
claim the rights already secured 10 us We ASK no law or
IF IN