The southern press. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-02-17

this territory founded in justice? Because, as
the records of the War Office show, OF the men
who fought the battles by which 1t was acquired
the South furnished forty-fve thousand, and a
large fraction over, and the North only twenty
three thousand, and small fraction over-show-
ing that the South furnished two to one Of the
men who went out to fight the battles OF the
country, which resulted in the acquisition of this
territory. Even if there were no other reasons,
upon the fair principles OF justice, the South
having paid also her proportion OF the expenses
of the war, we should have been entitled TO
share equally in the territory acquired But how
is it? Why, so far as California is concerned,
not even the gallant men from the South, who
went out to battle, were entitled, short time
afterwards, to enter it with their property. Even
If Washington, the Father of his Country, who
achieved our independence, were living to-day,
Southerner and slaveholderas he was, he would
not be entitled to enter that territory with his
property.
have said we had right there, founded in
justice, and that we had also a constitutional
right. Is it necessary to prove that this is a
constitutional right? Is it assumed by some
that it was a constitutional right because it re-
suited from the elementary principle Of the
equality of the States which lies at the founda
ton OF our government, and their consequent
equality of right in the territory, which is the
common property of all the States. This posi-.
ton was maintained in an argument never yet
answered, which was made by the honorable
Senator from Georgia. Mr.. BERkIEN, on the
question of the admission of California into the
Union, and it is not necessary for me to dwell
simply, in support Of this position, the opinion
of tie late chief justice Of Mississippi, (Chief
Justice Sharkey,) which will doubtless be re-
garded as high legal authority When what
was called the Mississippi October convention
was held, the first general meeting of the people
of our State in opposition to the measures of
Congress on the subject Of slavery, connected
with it, exclusion from the territories, Chief
Justice Sharkey. who was the president of that
convention, in his opening address to it, said
The attempt by Congress to prohibit slav-
cry in the territory Of California, has caused
this meeting. The territory is common pro-
perty. There each citizen of the United States
has equal rights, is entitled to equal freedom
in the enjoyment of the territories. am proud
to say, that in acquiring IL, Mississippans dis
played as much valor as any other portion of
their brethren in arms, and shed rs much blood
in proportion to their number as the citizens of
any of the States. They were distinguished
for their prowess in many hard fought battle,
but now they are to be told that restrictions are
to be imposed upon their right to enjoy the
conquest. Can we, should we yield the fruits
of our yalor, and surrender with it our consti-
tutional right Of equality"
The learned chief justice here gives his opin-
ion that this was right founded on the right of
the equality Of the States, to enjoy equally the
territory, which was the common property OF
the States. What does he say further!
Congress cannot deprive US of it, land ought
not, if it could; cannot say that if we 90 we
must leave our property behind US. Property
constitutes the means of enjoyment; and to ex-
clude the property of the people of the South
ern States is, in effect, TO exclude the people,
and appropriate the country to the Northern
States Such power is not possessed by a
government possessiny sovereignty could not
be rightfully exercised even by monarchy"
This was the opinion Of Chief Justice Sharkey
on this subject, when il first came before the
people of Mississippi. But il it is necessary to
prove by direct clause Of the Constitution
that we had constitutional right to an equality
in this territory, will read from an article in the
Constitution, which is directly in point. The
third section of the fourth article Of the Consti
tuition is in these words
THE Congress shall have power to dispose
Of, and make all needful rules and regulations
respecting, the territory or other property he
longing 10 the United States; and nothing il
this Constitution shall be so construed rs Il
prejudice any claims Of the United States, or Of
any particular State
do not read this clause Of the Constitution
for the purpose for which il is sometimes used
to show that Congress has jurisdiction, politica
4 4. r. al r.
ment over territories under this article; but FOL
the purpose Of showing, that by the last part o
il, every State has an equal constitutional riglr
in these territories. 1t lis in these words
"And nothing in this Constitution shall be 81
construed as 10 prejudice any claims Of thu
United States, or Of any particular State"
| have now established the fact that we bad {
constitutional right to an equality in these ter.
ritories upon principle admitted 10 be at th'
foundation OF our government, and | have alsC
established II by direct clause in the Constitu
ton, which says, that nothing in the Constitu
ton shall. be 80 construed as 10 prejudice th'
claims Of any particular State.
We have been Invested Of the constitutions
right in California, and the question ARISES
How have we been deprived Of IL?
The whole South assumed that Congress diC
not have the power 10 pass what 10 called th'
Wilmot proyiso, and thus by direct act de
clare that slavery should not exist there. Tn,
question arises, How, then, could the South b
excluded The answer is very simple. II de
ponds upon one or two propositions. IL de
Ponds, first, upon the fact whether the people
Of the territory themselves had a right 10 ex
clude us when Congress had not the power
Second, IL the people Of the territory did no
have the right to exclude US, then did Congress
have the right 10 waive the irreguarity, anc
thus give validity 10 this authorized act Of tn
people Of California! II depends, say, upor
one Of these two propositions. Congress haf
no power 10 exclude Us. Had the people o
the territory, acting outside Of the government
and the authority Of Congress, right 10 ex
clude us! And il they had not, had the Con
gress Of the United States right TO waive ID
iregularity in the admission Of Cslifornis.
] will read The opinion Of an eminent senator
who was here when the discussion on the nd
mission Of California FIRST took place, Mr.
Webster. but who is now connected will
another department Of the government, will
reference 10 the powers Of the people Of III,