The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-02-15
THE UNION.

slavery were abolished in Mexico BY force Of the
decree OF Guerrero in 1929, what slavery remained In
Mexico in 1887 10 be abolished by the acs Of the Mexi
can Congress- From 1922 supposng Guerero's decree
to be Of validity there was no longer slave within the
broad limits oil the Mexican territory. How, then, was
that in 1887. the Mexican Congress found Il neces
sary TO decree that. the slavery which had been
abolished for the eight preceding years should be
then reaboshed, and that provision should be made
for the payment OF the owners by scrip 10 be Is.
sued by the government upon personal valuation {
The only answer | think which The most fertile i'm
agnaton could furnish to this inquiry is that which
to be deduced from the very anomalous of many
proceedings OF thai government But again unless al
can be shown BY the constitution OF Mexico that the
Mexican Congress was invested with power oyer this
subject pray TO inquire OF what validity could their act
have beenl understand the Mexican confederation TO
have been formed upon the model OF our own-hat II
association OF States, vesting certain powers Tor
federal purposes in the Mexican Congress- and reservng
10 the several States those powers which necessary
to regulate their domestic concerns. have also under
stood, not merely from very superficial examination
and limited to books upon this subject, but from
conversation with intelligent persons familiar with the
subject that the power over this subject OF slavery be-
onged to the separate States Of the Mexican republic,
and not TO the confederated Congress have looked
into the constitution OF Mexico the only one 10 which
have had access without being able TO discover any
grant OF power by which this act, which is strictly OF
domestic character, should be withdrawn from the ars
dicton OF the States and vested in the Mexican Con-
gress. What would be thought Of an act Of the
Congress Of the United States declaring that slavery
should no longer exist in these conederated States
But er gratia, admitting the authority OF the Mex
lean Congress- to pass this act, look for moment
at the character of the act its terms, and provisions
| Il was not absolute but conditional emancipation
for which the act provided-not emancipation from It's
date, but certain specified conditions to be snbse-
quenily complied with This act shows very clearly thar
the decree OF Guerrero invalid, was mere waste pa
per, else there could have been necessity for It's en-
acment. But i did not declare, even il the Mexican
Congress had had the power, an emancipation which
they designed to take effect Instant from the passage
Of the act since they provided expressly for payment to
the owners and for the entertainment OF the value OF the
personal inspection Those provisions OF the act could
never have been carried into effect, the emancipation
had been immediate What was necessary under this
act OF the Mexican Congress, TO allow it, for the purpose
OF the argument, its full force and utmost validity, was,
that the negroes to be emancpaed should be appraised
that the scrip should be issued and then that the cert
cate OF emancipation should be granted. Until this was
done, the condition OF the negro was not changed. tie
still subject TO the dominion OF his owner, and to the
inspection OF the appraiser Otherwise the terms OF the
act would never have been complied with But it is
said, Mr.. President, that whether these laws were or
not regularly enacted, still the fact was. that they
respected as laws by the Mexican people, and that,
upon the transfer Of these Territories, they must be so con-
sidered by that is TO say in other terms, thai we are
to subject ourselves to tue laws Of foreign nation,
whether in point Of fact they were laws Of that nation
or not That IS the proposition.
Mr.. WEBSTER, lin his seat) Whether il were
part OF the actual code under which men lived in Next
co at the time.
Mr. BERRIEN That is. in other words, simply
people OF Mexico which is the manner in which have
treated it. Certainly, the strongest evidence in favor of
the existence and validity OF this Mexican law is the
statement which can neither affirm deny, that Afri
can slavery does not in fact exist there's and the pre-
sumption thence arising, that its abolition has been the
suit OF acq1escence on the part Of the people in this law
Perhaps this may be explained by the fact that African
slavery did not exist in many oil the Mexican States and
where it did was easily substituted by the system OF
peoaage. What mean to say is, that we have no ev-
dence before us TO show the authority OF the Mexican
Congress TO enact this lawnone to prove compliance
ith its termsnor the extent and motives Of the alleged
acquescence Of the Mexican people, and that these are
questions into which we have night TO inquire when
this law is put forward in tribunals binding upon
us. This right exists as to our own laws, and must
ortiori in relation to the laws Of foreign nation II
terrqria legislature should pass law prohibiting sla-
very in these Territories should have right to in
quire into their authority to enact Il; and surely we
mus, nays IKE snt ~ regard 70 me ~ laws o. ns *.
territory we have entered into an obligation TO respect
the laws preexstng there Sir, apprehend this is not
true in the which is asserted The principle
commended for is said have been sustained by the de-
csions of the Supreme Court and yet, when those de-
csions called for, we uniformly referred to a
solitary casehat Of the American Insurance Company
Canter reported by Cranch; in which the proposition
is said TO be laid down, that upon the acquisition. either
by conquest cession of foreign territory, the laws Of
altered by the laws Of the conquefing or acquiring
country. Such is the statement OF II by gentlemen
who bave heretofore relied the obligation Of Next
can laws in the Territories OF New Mexico and Caor
was mere obiter diaum, certainly OF very distin
gushed man, but not the decision OF the court upon any
question at issue; secondly that II affirmed only OF
particular class OF the laws OF conquered or ceded
country; and thirdly that did not require the specific
and separate repeal even OF these laws. | will
trouble the Senate with brief remark this subject
Chief Justice Marshall did not affirm that all the laws
OF coded country remain in force until they are repealed
by the acquiring country but simply that the civil and
municipal laws, those which relate to the intercourse
between citizen and citizen. did continue in force
til thus abrogaed But there another class oil laws
recognised BY the learned judge, as well as by every
judge and every writer upon international la. who treats
upon this question: and that is the public or political law
The public political law OF the coded country
TO be OF force sand upon the transfer and all that
is left is the civil municipal law regulating intercourse
what is civil municipal law and what public po
fitca lawi When we have asccrained that. and when
gentlemen show that this latter class oil laws -
baced IN the proposition which they rely they will have
made advance in the discussion this subject which
they have attained in any OF its previous stages
Chei Justice Marshall in rendering the decree m the case
which has been referred to- expressed the opinion which
have stated, as dedueed from international law. SO in
the case Of Hall Campbell, reported in Cowper, which
grew GU, OF the conquest OF New Granada by the British
government, similar opinion is expressed That, also.
was p obner dictum, not aqueslon necessary 10 the de-
cison oil the point in issue which was, whether the king
oil England by his sovereign power, unconnecied with
the Parliamentary the force OF his prerogative
could do certain acts. But all these authorities make the
distinction which have stated TO you between public
or political law and civil municipal law, Urging the
ton OF The former Then, have said, our inquiry is.
what the public political law Vael gives this
answers
are reyu,tions no nnll.c