The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-06-24

cutsd By precisely the same persons Yet, why
are there no complaints that white men are thus
summariiy delivered up, when they have fled
from land OF oppression TO one OF liberty
Why are the complaints made OF the character
of those proceedings confined to the delivery of
fugitive slaves alone Is il because, in the case
Of the fugitive slave, it is impo ssbe, as have
shown, that there can be oppression lie has
better opportunities, ten times over, OF ascer-
tanning his right to freedom in any Of the South
ern States, than the fugitive from Justice has in
establishing his innocence either in England or
the Northern States
Now, sir, do not mean to come here TO say
that the repeal OF the fugitive slave law, with
out the substitution of another equally effective
will lead to the dissolution Of this Union. do
not mean to say that, because know that there
is, amongst great many persons, disposition
TO laugh at the idea that there is any danger of
that result; but | do come here TO prove il to
such men as are rational upon that point.
In the language Of the Supreme Court of the
United States
~tlistorcally it is well known that The OBJ
jet Of this clause was 10 secure to the citizens
OF the slaveholdng States the complete right
and title of ownership in their slaves, an proper
ty, in every State of the Union into which they
might escape from the State where they were
held in seryitude The foil recognition of this
right and title was indispensable TO the security
OF this species of property in all the slavehod.
ing States and, indeed, was so vital to the pre-
se'vation of their domestic interests and institu-
tions, that it cannot be doubted that il consti
tuted flu damental article, without which the
Union could not have been formed It's true
design was to guard against the doctrines and
principles prevalent in the non.slaveholdng
I,,, 4
WITH or obslructng, or abolishing the rights of
owners of slaves"
And, in the language Of Chief Justice Thigh
man, already quoted
"Whaiever may be our private opinions on
the subject of slavery, IL is toeH knotea that our
Southern brethren would not have consented to
become parties 10 Constitution under which
the United States has enjoyed so much pros
perity, unless their property in slaves had been
secured"
When the Constitution of the United States
was formed, there was not the same necessity
for provision to guarantee the surrender of
fugitive slaves as there is now. AT that time
all the States of the Union with the single ex-
cep ion ofM ssachusets, were slaveholding Be-
tween the slaveholding States there has never
been any great necessity for this provision. The
provision grew out of The forecast of our fathers
who saw that the Nor.hern States would grad
ually become non slaveholding States. If we
were all to have remained slaveholding States
there never would have been any necessity for
any such law. The necessity in prospect, how
ever, ut that time, was so obvious that il WAS
insisted upon as a SINE qua non, and the Consii-
tuition would not have been formed but for it,
Do gentlemen suppose that when the necessity
for it has greatly augmented, that the South is
so insenaible to its rights, that they will agree
now to give upithe provision which they insisted
upon as sine qua non at the time of the forma-
ton of the Constitution Sir, they not only
will not submit to this thing, because they will
find their rights to their slave property, and their
domestic peace, to be insecure by the repeal of
that law but they will do it for another and
higher reason. They would find by such ne
ton that no confidence is to be put in consttu-
tional guarantees. They would find that all
the laws of society, under the influence of
fanatcism, could be set at defiance; and all
friends of liberty, regulated by law, would see
that they were in an unfortunate political ALI
ance and they would be swift to dssoveit
The House knows that am no Dsunionist
Even in my own State, have been accused of
having too great an idolatry for the Union, and
of willingness to submit to things | ought
Fnot, to sustain it. ! come not here to threaten
gentlemen, but to reason with them. have
already shown that the right of the Southern
people to have their runaway slaves delivered
up to them, is q clear, weldefned, and not
disputed right If it is withheld by those who
have, in the most solemn manner agre. I'd TO Sc.
cure it, what ought the South to do? With
your knowledge of our feelings-I am not
speaking of yours--wih your knowledge of our
feelings, what ought we with those feelings to
do :! Change our position and what would You
do will take an illustration: at the time of
the formation of the Constitution, the North,
then as now, were ayerse to the increase of
slavery, by the importation of slaves they de.
sired the abolition of the foreign slave trade A
portion of the South were unwilling that it
should be abolished. But it was agreed that
Congress should have the power to prohibit the
Importation of slaves after ISO8 The Cousti-
tuition of the United States does not require, that
the Importation of them shall be prohibited after
that time; but still am free to admit that such
was the understanding on all hands Now,
suppose the South had majority in the two
Houses of Congress, and should in despite of
this common understanding--not as in the case
OF the fugitive slave law, in spite Of the express
provision of the Constituton--but in spite Of
this understanding should repeal the law for
bidding the foreign slave trade The demand
for slaves exceeds the supply; and this reards
the growth of new slave States. There is room
in Texas alone for million or more of them
than she has. Well, suppose we had a MAORI
ty in the two Houses; and, with the avowed OBJ
Ject of increasing our political preponderance in
the Union, we should repeal the prohibition of
the importation of slaves and at the same time
prohibit the migration of white persons, wha,
would the North say! Would they stand it I?
No, sir-no! And if they would, they ought not
Do they suppose that we would be submissive
in more ilagrant case? Gentlemen, think of it,
Do not say to US, you have not the votes to do
this. So we have not. But in case where
the Constitution is concerned, majority does
not give right The very object OF written con-
stitutions is to protect minorities.
Sir, there have been several vital conflicts be
tween the North and the South On each re.
currence of them there has been an increased
residum of discomfort left, both at the North
and the South. There was much discomfort
with the Missouri compromise, more with the
tariff compromise, and the sting which is still
felt. Notwithstanding the late nnciic ation 10