The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-01-13

tween East and West" Thus il is manifest tina
all the power OF the Southern States in thi'
Government is forever destroyed with con
fict of interest between the two sections, we cal
expect nothing but insult and oppression, which
are to be ritigated only by the mildness Of on'
opposition to Northern DEGREES, and the grace
with which we submit to the reign Of despot
ism.
4th. The bills which establish territorial
governments for Utah and New Mexico cover
the balance of the territory in question, and we
are next To inquire whether the Southern peo-
pie ARE permitted to emgrate thereto with slave
property. The committee are unanimously in
the opinion that slaves are forever excluded
,herefrom, LIST. BY the supposed existence OF
the Mexican law which prohibits slavery, and
I'd. BY the threatened application of the Will
mot Proviso by Congress, should slaves bc car
ried TO that territory, or the local law be set
aside by decision Of the Supreme Court.
Whether the Mexican law against slavery has
any validity in that territory is IL question upon
which there seems to be great difference OF
opinion. The Committee, however, agree with
Senator Berrien, that the Federal Constitution
operates to repeal the local law. But the entire
| North and considerable number of the South
entertain different opinion, and assert that the
Mexican law continues in force until il is re-
pealed by an act of Congress. Mr.. Clay has
stated with the utmost confidence that a large
majority of the iursts of the u. s. coincide with
him in opinion, and that if he believed otherwise
he would have insisted upon making the Will
mot Proviso plrt of his famous omnibus.
A large majority in Congress sanctioned the
doctrine that the Mexican law would exclude
slavery-a large majority refused to repeal that
law, and they did so because it would effect the
same object desired to be accomplished by the
Wilmot Proviso. Now, we ask, il the refusal to
repeal the Mexican law, upon the ground stated
does not indicate the same hostility by the Fed
| era Government to the institution Of slavery as
the passage directly of the Wilmot Proviso
And is the forbearance by Congress to pass the
| Wimot PrOvisO any concession to the South
when the only reason stated for such fol bear
ance is the full conviction of the minority that
slavery is already excluded. BE sides, what con.
cession could it be to the South for Congress 10
decline the exercise of palpably unconstitu.
tional power. And we deny that there is any
security against its exercise should it hereafter
become necessary Since the passage of the
great peace measures" and in the midst OF
the ''patriotc rejocings" over the prostration Of
Southern rights and honor insult has beer
added to injury by the introduction of bills to
apply this odous Proviso to the territories OF
| Utah and New Mexico. Then what security is
there in carrying slaves to these territories
Who can be induced to take the risk With
expensive, troublesome and doubtful litigation
and the certainty of being stripped Of our prop
erty by Congress, should the courts decide ir
our favor, we ask if the Southern people are
not thus forever deprived of all rights in these
territories
9TH The next measure of aggression upor
Southern rights is the bill which takes ten mil.
lions of the public money to buy territory
enough from Texas to make two free States
| The right Of Texas TO the territory which she
is required to sell is too clear to be questioned
| However doubtful it may have been regarded by
some prior to the war with Mexico, since that
event it has been considered by the South at
least as fully established. And the next ques-
| ton to be determined is, what effect does the sale
of this territory by Texas have upon Southern
rights The committee are of opinion that the
South is prejudced thereby in two particulars
Ist Slave territory sufficient to make two States
is taken from Texas and turned over to Free
SOIL I'd. The Southern people are required to
pay more than half the purchase money for this
territory without getting any share in the ben
efts of the purchase? Was j. slave territory
before, and is it made free by the sale The bill
] uader consideration admits territory TO be par
IF The limits Of Teas. 1.-THE territory proposed
10 BE- purchased belongs 10 The Stale Of Texas, il
is in The poacer Of no earthly tribunal 10 conner.
any part of IL into FreesoH loithom her consent
bee use the Constitution of the United States
expressly provides that ''no new Stale shall BE-
formed or erected icitiin The jurisdiction Of ana
other STATE or any State be formed by The juno
lion of moo or more STATES, or parts of States
Without The consent If The legislatures Of The STATE,
concerned, as ,oeh as of Congress" 1t is insisted
however, that Texas and Congress agreed al III,
instance Of The Nrth, (Which is evidenced by the
resolutions of annexation.) that so far as SLAYER,
in the territory north of the Missouri line was
concerned, the consent of Texas should not be
necessary to its abolition. This is true, but
the bill under consideration overrides the resolu
tons of annexation, sets aside the agreement
therein in this particular by coming down South
of the Missouri line, and TAXI G territory enough
from Texas to make State When the Nortf
refused to comply with the agreement made al
her own instance in the resolutions of annexa
ton. every principle of justice and equity re
leased Texas thereirom, and from that instant
her consent became necessary to the abolition o.
slavery in any part Of her limits and before the
passage of this bill, her consent was necessar,
to the formation If State out of the territory
efeH worm 81 90 degrees oU minutes.
| The committee are not prepared to say that
the making of the territory purchased from
Texas, a part of New Mexico, and putting i
under her control and jurisdiction, ipso tacto, con
verts it into Free-soil, neither can they say thai
the lamb by being left with the wolf was ipSc
facto destroyed; but they do assert that the los,
of the lambs life WIS highly profitable conse
quence of being thrown into such company-st
they say that the conversion of this territory
into Free-soil, is highly probable consequence
of its being annexed TO New Mexico. 1t being
thus established that the Southern people cal
never enjoy any part of the territory to be sold
by Teya is IL not grievous wrong, that they
should be compelled to pay more than half III,
purchase money? When, it the territory re
manned, rs it should open every principle o
right and justice upon The jurisdiction of Texas
the South could not only enjoy it as property
but she would ultimately have the benefit of it.
representation ns a slave State; whereas she i
to be deprived of all such benefit, and must sub
nit to being robbed of her substance to purchas
the means of swelling the rising dangerou
- H..