The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-01-29

tween Texas md the United States. Can that con
| tract be modified without the consent OF the par
tics; Can vigor strength be given 10 that con-
tract by this resolution!
He had voted against the bills granting govern.
ments 10 the Territories of Utah aud New Mexico.
| New Mexico presented herself in the same position
as California. She adopted constitution and ask
| ed admission into the Union. lie at that time
in favor Of admitting her State, and since then
| had never doubted the wisdom Of that policy She
had, by her constitution prohibited slavery, and,
If she admitted with that constitution, the sub.
Ject OF slavery would have been settled forever.
This was the leading motive which induced him to
prefer her admission State TO giving her ter
rtorial government This resolution declared
these acts to be final, neither to be altered or
amended, This could not be So for in course
of time New Mexico will be admitted as "A state,
and her constitution will take the place Of this ter
ritorial act.
The next measure the act abolshins the
slave trade in the District of Columbia. This was
a very small affair, and he supposed no one was
disposed to disturb that
He had voted against the Fugitive Slave law be-
he thought it his duty to do and not FROM
any unwillingness objection to the proper exc
cution Of any part Of the Constitution. He wac not
of those who held fast to part Of the Consti
tuition and disregarded the other. He was for the
proper observance and execution OF the whole in
srument.
He would have voted for suitable law lie did
not regard the law which had been passed a
suitable law. 1t was an unsuitable law and some
tuition were disregarded by its provisions The
Constitution provided that in all questions Of
property where its value exceeded twenty dollars.
the parties had the right to trial by jury No
citizen could be arraigned upon any criminal
charge except on the indictment found by grand
inquest; and no man could be tried for any offence,
no matter how criminal, unless by jury of his
peers The Constitution threw these safeguards
around the rights of the citizen in his person and
property. The trial by jury was the great shield
OF the citizen against power, and these were some
Of The fundamental principles by which the Con
stitnlon successfully guarded the property and
| these principles are disregarded; under its pruvi
sions the great questions involved are not TO be de
termined by jury, or by Judge, but by an IN
ferior mag istrate, who holds his office but for
day, or q week, or year. The questions are also
| to be decided by summary proccss-by proceed
inss in a corner-and not by an open public trial
1t also to be decided upon purte testimony.
He would not say the law was unconstitutional.
He attributed the fact that this law did How
the issues arising under it to be determined by
uries to dstrust OF the citizens ~ho composed the
juries in the free States Such fears and feelings
| OF distrust were groundiess
He not one Of those who would cncoura ge
opposition resistance to this law; he had no
nex;on with those who had such object in view.
| lie was for leaving the law TO time He thought
| the time would come when an act OF milder tea
lures, and more in conformity with all other judicial
proceedings in this country, would be found better,
not only for the persons alleged as fugitives, but
for those whoar interested in their recovery. Till
| such time he was for letting the act stand
| He then pointed out the great injury which the
country had sustained by this slavery agitation
occupying the whole time OF Congress
| When the iron manufacturer Of Pennsylvania.
who compelled u put out the fires OF his furnaces
appeals to Congress for protection, his prayers are
disregarded, and the answer is, Congress has no
time TO devote to other matters than this slavery
agitation. The same response Is made to the
| cotton and woollen spinncrs, and TO the mariner
whose yesse! is wreck cd for of the necessary