The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-05-18

with tie Territory remain unrepealed by ex-
press legislation, with the admission OF the
Territory as a State into the Union the ques-
tion assumes another shape. Congress had but
the limited authority Of a guardian over the
Territory = the State is sovereign power.
The failure of the local authorities, therefore.
to repeal the Mexican laws, acquired win the
Territory, abolishing slavery, may DC con-
sidered equivalent to the adoption OF those
laws by the Territory and by the State.
Again, slavery is the creature OF legisiat on
Able statesmen and jurists concur in this-that
slavery cannot exist in country where It has
not previously existed, except by express en-
actment Of the supreme authority. 1t must be
recognized or established by law. 1t is an ar
tifcal institution. The action of Congress in
relation to the Territories of Utah and New
Mexico in 1850, fully corrohorates all these
views. Between such constructions OF the sub
ject as those of Mr.. Calhoun, Mr.. Webster end
others, Congress fell back upon the constitu-
tonal sovereignty of the people, and submitted
the question Of slavery in Utah and New Mexi-
CO to the final decision of the people thereof,
when they shall have organized themselves
under the sovereignty of State. In the mean
time, we perceive that the Territorial authori-
ties of Utah. under their construction OF the or
ganic law of Congress, have recognized the in
stitution of slavery, and there are said to be
quite number Of negro slaves among the Nor
mons. We are also informed that there are
slaves owned among the people Of New Mexico,
under cover Of their Territorial organization.
Why not? Congress has no power to exclude
slavery from the territories, nor can
it delegate a power which it does not
possess. Southern men, therefore, with their
slave property, may go into the Terrific
ries, whatever their local laws; but the moment
a Territory assumes the sovereignty of State,
itmay admit or exclude slavery, Immediately
or prospecively, as it may think fit. II it
does nothing upon the subject, the pre-existing
Territorial order of things is established If,
for example, upon the admission of New Mex
leo as State, nothing shall have been done
repeating the local laws upon slavery derived
from Mexico, they are in force, though nope
rative while the country was in a Territorial
condition. Otherwise, slavery by the consti-
territory
Thus we reconcile, then, the views of Mr.
Calhoun and Mr.. Webster. The rights of the
people of all the States, with all their proper
ty, in the Territories, are equal under the con-
stitution. Thus any local laws acquired with
sxarx o1,Ii eli IF off
This was the view of Mr.. Calhoun. But ii
such local laws remain unrepealed upon the
admission of such Territory as State into the
Union, slavery is prohibited in such Territory,
for those laws are thus adopted This was the
doctrine of Mr. Webster and of Mr.. Clay, And
upon this understanding the question Of slave
ry in Utah and New Mexico was transferred to
the Judgment of the people, in the compromise
acts of 1850
According to the.yrinciples Of those conrro-
mise measures, Utah being the very first OF the
Whole series, Mr.. Cntting proposes to modify
the Kansas-Nebraska bill. And we repeat.
why not? If the Missouri restriction is uncon-
stitutional i is nullity. 1t needs no legisla-
tiol to repeal it. If Congress has no power to
exclude the Southern man with his slave pro-
perry from she Territories, it can do nothing
but organize the government, and leave the
suhsct of slavery to tia people. 1t strikes Us
that the proposition of Mr. Cutting is simple.
clear and conclusive, and must be satisfactory,
if adopted, TO TIE whole country. The repeal
of the Missouri line involves the acknowledge
ment Of its validity, and i. is the violent rup
ture of a compact thus confessed to be obi
gatory unless. formally repealed. 1t requires
no such foTmality. We hope that the friends
of the Nebraska bill, of the sovereignty Of the
people, and of the national sentiments Of the
country according to the principles of the
compromise measures of 1850, will give their
favorable attention to the proposed substitute
Of Mr.. Cutting. Let him, at all events, put it
to the House.