Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1852-08-13

RECHMOND ENQUIRER
,EDNEsDAY MORNING, AUGUST 10. IL
ANOTHER nUMBUG SHOWN UP.

V
ANOTHER nUMBUG SHOWN W. .., ,n,,,s,
The Scott journals have sought TO MAKE .r nd
Gen Pierce because in the House n0 slaves into the
mond Brooke of Georgetown, o" o'r or tho l,w of
District of Columbia against me .o.,;,ions unon
| MARYLAND Of 1896, which paceu ,o,,oa hv Tn,
| =, ;,a,o,;,n of slaves and ~hch wac uu0p''o y
Tue , for the government OF that portion OF uie
sress rs w uubiu coded tho United States by Mary
I rbat law was pissed at The instance oil saSehoioeS
- 81, their benc6tin other words TO prevent Inc teuac
an IN the value OF slave labor which, 1t WINS believed would
.nsuc if Maryland became stocked with slaves from
other States as il was feared she might be-
This senseess prctext of the champions Of Stewards can
ddae 10 cover the euormy of their course BY assu
ing the soundness of Gen. Pierce is completely exposed Dy
tho Washington Union-and is consigned to the same igno
minious tomb with the New Boston caumny during all
this time (says the Unon the southern wings are aching
in open and notorious alliance with the worst enemies OF
the South; and they yet know that the men VINO oclaed 'e
nomination of General Scott who enjoy his confidence VINO
,otc his canvass and who will shape his administration
and dictate his policy in the event OF his election are mold
ing I'D 10 the abo,ioniss General Scotls promise oil pow.
or and patronage and denouncng Gen Pierce as one
welded to southern interests In order make him obnoxious
TO them.
The particular vote to which we refer was given on the
I2h of ynnc 1884 while General Pierce member of
the House of Representatives The Missouri Compromise
had been adopted than twelve before that time ana
the abolitions,s had then commenced the ansuVeIy
agitation in Congress. The bill which the vote was
given involved principle either extending or limiting sia-
very and placed limitation the rights OF shareholders
excep, that imposed by the law of Maryland similar 10 laws
in other slavehodng States and by the saVeo
es in the District of Columbia for their protection IN 'he
enjoyment Of their property Many not most, OF Tue
avrhodng States have deemed policy to prohibit the
States ne
taed BY the desires Of the saveownes themselves VINO
wished 10 ni, competition and prevent The reduction IN
the prce of slave labor The right OF State TO enact suc
aws was prominent point in Judge McLeans opinions III
the case OF Groves and Slaughter and ms argument IN ao
of the right our readers will remember, was citeu oy "
Fillmore in S45 in letter TO James Brooks, Esq., "nch
was npbsbed by all the southern wing papers, and deemed
perfectly satisfactory, notwithstanding Mr Fifnofes ie
ter 10 The Erie abollunists and his votes "hil3 eoet
Congress 1896 the State OF Maryland passed an ac pro-
hb,np The introduction Of slaves except by persons re-
moving into The State with the bona de intention oi oe
coming residents Such persons were allowed 10 o"s WIN
,ben, ar introduce within year, such slaves as oeioneoa
70 hem nj The time of their removal Slaves introduced IN
opposion to the law ceased BIO slaves In SOl after tue
cession of the District of Columbia by the oaes OF mary
land and Virginia. act was passed oy congress WHO"
continued all the Maryland laws which were in force at The
time of the in that OF the District ceded by e
and continued the laws of Virginia in that part ceoeo ny
Virginia. OF course the Maryland law relative to the n-
PRODUCTION o slaves adopted oy Congress as u a
part of the District north OF the Potomac
In 1884 ono Edmund Brooke resident of Georgetown
wished 10 have private passed for his benefit by which
he might be permitted 10 introduce slaves from Virginia
into that portion of the District ceded by Maryland Inc
saveownes of the District were in favor oil the Maryland
law, and did desire any relaxation oil It. lhey ~isneo
prevent reduction in The value Of slave labor by limit
Ing the supply and preventing competition; and ut this mo-
ment they would resist the repeal OF the law OF lSo we
can find stated why Mr. Brooke should nave oeen
permitted 10 bring his slaves into the District which
would apply with equal force in all other instances and
require the repeal Of the law Government should proceed
by general and not by special egsaOn and except IN very
peculiar cases the operations of law should not be inter-
ered with hy private exempng particular individuals
from their operation While the law OF 1870, l on Inc
ought 10 be complied WITH ana II II is I'M
polite or oppressive it should be repealed; but Ocn fece
is no more responsible for its continuance than any oher
person who has been member Of Congress- since the Dis
,rc, was ceded United States and his responsibility
is not 10 Tint Of the shareholders Of
Southern States who have passed similar laws OF the
Of Maryland who passed the particular law
or of tho slave Of the District Of Columbia, who
demanded lis execution as species OF protection OPP
Grating like prohibory duty on labor IN Inc DIS
,rict In order TO show the of feeling at the
time will mention that in 633the year before the vote
complained Of by the Southern Whigsthe Legislature of
Maryland increased the gors of tho law of 1885, by repeal
ing lis second section which permitted the Introduction OF
slaves by persons removing into the State with the inlen
ton of becoming residents thus entirely prohibiting their
importation under any circumstances. The sentiment
this subject may be further Understood by considering the
fact that since the ccsion Of the District there only TWO
instances in which liberty has been granted for the intro
duc,on of slaves Since 1884, questions in which slaves
are involved viewed with different eyes, and often de-
cided by considerations which entertained thcn
General Pierce had agency in producing this alteration in
the temper of the public mind; and the character Of the
saus made him by Southern Wings should be denounc-
ed by every Southern dangerous TO Southern nsu-
ons for they emineny calculated TO strengthen the
hands their berest enemies and TO Destroy by iase-
hood perveson those northern who are swayed o
enlarged and liberal views. The particular assault which
we have Just exposed Is ridiculous and conempube and
would never have been brought forward but by men who
feel contempt the public intelligence and are ready to
seize on any pretext plea shelter them from the
odium which, they must be sensible is merted by their de-
sertion to the support Of MIR. Stewards candidate.
--S<>--