Columbus Democrat. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-18??, 1851-04-05

iusaaai. s11rssied a1anbls oPini7a e o.
a eansromiss line, sai va aIl.lag la
sibui. 10 r.. Is lhe lias Of dirissiaa. Nov e
alI know Who bare read he above quotation
slavery nonh Of 90 dsg. so miu.' was '.Prohib-
ae,g'' BY tho e1prsss iangaass ef ne law; and
,hisp obibi,Ion vas 10 principle aad language ihe
Wfmot prosiso. so odioas 10 The south. Il is APP
parent then, had this line been established by
Congress, slavery would have been prohibited 10
Utah. and 10 the greaier portion Of New Mexico
as The limits Of both are defined in the late adj
jus,meal-lor tie whole Of Utah lies north Of the
s7th deg. Of north latitude. aad extends up north
to the 42nd deg Of north latitude aud New
Mexico, except small portion said mol to be
valuable, lies also north Of 80 deg 80 min, north
latitude.
Having stated the terms Of the Missouri COM
promise, and the geographical position cf Utah
and New Mexico, we will now quote from the
adjustment, the language Of the law in relation
10 these territories. The same provision is
applicable to both. The latter clause Of the
2nd section reads thus
"And provided further, that when admitted as
State, that said territories, or any portion oil the
same. shall be reccired into tie UaioR NTH or
rii.out sarery as their consultation may prescribe
! al the time Of their admission"
Here then il is established, that that portion
i of the Missouri compromise which favored the
the institution of slavery south of SO deg 80
min. is .engrafed into the territorial bills OF
Utah and New Mexico, covering region of
country nearly the whole Of which extends up 10
the 40 deg. Of north latitude.
! The Hon. Jacob Thompson, who voted for the
Utah bill states that there are now slaves in
Utah, aud that their owners ",'cre undisturbed
their possession.
Now these two territories are in all respects
in the same condition. Tho language Of the
one bill, is the language of the other.
Suppose a slave to escape from the territory
Of Utah to the State Of New York, would the
owner by the provisions ofthc adjustment be au.
lhorized TO reclaim him and TO take him back tc
that territorR
This is ain important question. and its solution
will 70 far TO settle tho minds Of some, as TO
whether the adjustment recognizes The principle
Of projection OF properly in slaves in these ter
ritories Of Utah and New Mexico.
Let US look to the law, as tho highest evl.
dence Of the fact at issue. We quote the 9th
section entire of lhe fugitive slave law.
SEC. G. And be i! further enacted, That when
a person held TO service or labor in any State or
Territory Of the United States, has heretofore, or
shall hereafter escape into another State or Terri
torn Of the United States, the person or persons
10 whom such service Or labor may be due, or
his, he., or their agent or attorney, duly author
: lzed by power Of attorney, IN writing acknowI,
) edged and certified under the seal OF some lega
officer or court Of the State or Territory in which
. the sumo may be executed, may pursue and re-
claim such fugitive person, either by procuring
= a warrent from solac one Of the court, Judges
q os Commissioners aforesaid, Of the proper circuit
a district or county, for the apprehension Of sucl
j fugitive from service or labor, or ny sez'ng an
arrestng such fugitive, where the same can b.
: done wiihou, process, and by taking, or CAUSING
such persoos to be taken, forthwith before sue
Il court Judge or Commissioner, whose duty
+ shall be to hear and determine the case OF stc
claimant ia summary manners and upon salts
factory proof being made, by deposition or all
! davit, inwriling, to be taken and certified by sue
ID court. Judge, or Commissioner OF BY other sat-:
j. factory testimony, duly taken and certified b
some court, magistrate justice Of the peace, {
other LEGAL officer authorized 10 administer a
= oath and take deposition under the laws 81 N
Y State or Territory from which such person oV
d inn service or labor may have escaped, with
N certificate Of such magstracy Or Other aolhor
: ty. AZ aforesaid, with the seal Of the proper cou
y or officer thereto attached, which seal shall!
Y sufficient ID establish the competency OF u
q proof and with proof also by affidavit, Of the ide
40 THY ofthe person whose service or labor IS clam
/, inc him or her. Id the State or Territory trn
which such fugitive may have escaped AS asor
y said. and that said person escaped, TO make 9
u, IL deliver TO such claimant his or her at OF al
n certificate setting firth the subian,lal facts us
thp service Or labor due from such fugitive to 7
claimant, aud of his or her escape from the ga
or Terrilory in which such service or labor
,at due, 10 he State or Territory in which he or
i, was arrested, with authority to such claimant
his or her agent or attorney, 10 use such re
'fc sonable force and restraint as may be necessa
80 under the circumstances ofthe case to take
70. remove such fugitive persons back 10 the Slate
%. Territory whence he or she may have escap
d ma aforesaid. In no trial or hearing under t
~ act shall the testimony Of such alleged fugitive
md admitted IN evidence; and The certificate IN U
fed and the first section mentioned, shall be conc
sve or the right Of the person or persons
-, whose favor granted, TO remove such might've
=" the State or Territory from which he escap
se' and shall prevent al molestation OF such perso
on. by any process issued BY any court, Judge mi
or istra,e, or other person, whomsoever,
30 The law answers the question in tho affirm
ia t;vo Wa think il not unreasonable 10 say [