Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1854-10-17
THE CASS CREED.

An Indecent outburet of passion inc i"f'o" f'
Press returns To the defence Of General 0aT'' VIII" y
much of GOOD temper and dccorous language, ms I
warrant the inference that the article ID hot tue PO
duction of all ordinary contributor 10 lis eoiu"h'
Perhaps VIC hazard nothing in dcnucihs TIC lur'he
conclusion, that no other person than General Nas
himself ia tho author Of tho worry prollA ana d'S'hgcH
uous, and, in that respect, characteristic vindieat'o
Of bis political coroor, which appears in Il journal til"
il known 70 bs his chuson medium OF communicated
with tho public. In any event, the article in quostio
must be taken Us n formal and authoritative eNpos
ton Of the political creed OF Tue N''"'s"" 'o'es.'
and. regarding it us sucl, we pr"pose to make 1t In
text of n brief commentary.
Against the narrative oi the diplomatic anu Scha
,orial achievements of General Cas-, III when the VIII
tor e~xpatiates with an egotistiral PLEASURE we SHAH OIL
for ~, word of dissent. We are not insensiblc to tn
uhlic s.rvices OF General Cass, although NO may no
DO disposed to accept the cStra'asant es''hu'o "
which his friends value them. Inc writer III the IRE
Press il welcome to whatever sympathy ne may llilili
~ propitia,e in favor OF his hero, by the most hyper
bolicsl panevyric on his public career. Our concor1
= with tho present position ,and principles OF Genera
Cuss, in 30 fur as they affect the Interests oil the SCUM
| and OF these the FREE I't" 6'
concise exposition:
ave will close this article by hrleny s'aIlng ''eho
ral Cass's position, for tho beneht OF inc h'chmon'
En,nirer and of everybody elso who is ignorant Oft
lie maintains: ~,
II. That Congress had No power to pass tho VIII
mot proviso; ,, un
o,or sIavorv e;,h.r in IN. States or Territories, OK
cent 10 provide for carrying into execution tho iuS'
tive-slavc requision;
"3. That tho Territories arc entitled 10 seii,Go'crh
msnt in all respects not controlled oy 'he |ohs'''u
ton; A..
~. That slavery can only exist by virtue OF TIT
law of the place;
as. That there is no provision in the Constitution
which carries slavery into any Territory where II u'
not exist at the time OF the acquisition;
&C. That it can only exist there by virtue VI Id"
passcd by tho territorial government.
"All this Gen. Cas- has steadily maIntained. An'
this right of sclf.goverrncnt from which lhcse lr
suits flow has been ! '''k u, !, be called MI what it may
i, trsi,t. in tho principles and in tho hearts OF the
American people. .h, Lin ,o,.l
!, ctfcc, ior the establishment OF these principles i"r'
r. the constitution gives the right to take slaves 10 n
Territory, then Congress cannot authorize inc 'crtl'o-
rial legislature ~ take away tina right.
"AnI this constitutes tile triumph of Gen. Cas-
that the South, which wns nj first pecullariy opPoseu
10 the Wow of this local power over slavery, mas now
| come M, almost az one man, 10 its support. W VIII
warcr our democracy against tile Emperor Nichoi"S
and his advocates that the writer OF inc ar.lcle w W.
| Richmond Enquirer has had to surrender some Oh MS
extreme fanstical opinions 10 the march OF truth' ana
thai he has NOT tho macnanimity TO forgive the man
who has contributed 90 much to the establishment OF
correct principles.
II ia we'll known tina, General Cass opposed the
enactment of the Wilmo Proviso, and this simple
f,ct won him some favor in tho South. lie comes
forward now, and spontaneously relieves the South
of nil obligation, on account OF his opposition to tho
| Wilmot Proviso, BY assuring us that his conduct in
this instance was determined, not by regard for our
interests, but by a principle Of constitutional c'n'Du''
ton which tho people of the South unanimously con-
denim as equally absurd and mieclievous' 1t appears
from his present confession, that lie Inns refused L"
suppor, the Wilmot Proviso, not because OF l's I'M
Just and oppressive operation as respects the rights OIL
the South, but only because it violates his iavoritc
theory OF Congressional noa-t"tcrrc"t'on. The con-
duct of a public man, however pruiseworthy III ap-
pearanco, may justly provoke the scvercst censure
whom construed with reference 10 It's aim and motive.
Opposition 10 the Wilmot Proviso has been regarded
as presumptive evidence OF a liberal spIrlt III a
Northern man, bu; General Cass has shown that It
may 10 simply the development Of a vicious prlncl-
IC VI
serving reprnbation rather than applause.
The second ard third articles in the Cass creed, np.
pear to be only different enc Of tho same
proposition, and both do, in fact, affirm, the doctrine
ot s~yuatrr sore,egnty; but the sweeping negation in
the second, of all power in Congress 10 legislate re-
spoc,ing slavery in the territories, amounts 10 IN in
dependent. substantive principle, which, as the lcgitl-
mate inference from the syumtcr sovereignty doctrine,
agyravates tho absurdity and mischief OF the original
nropo.ition. We Of tho South contend not simply
that Congress may, bnt that Congress must ieS's-
late respecting slavery i'll the territories Ill certain
circumstances and under certain lAn!tatiohs. "eno'
only affirm the porer, but We clairnits exercise when
necessary, az a lnatter of right with us, ana OF d"y
on the part of Congress. Slavery is u species OF pro-
marty. md in entitled to all the safeguards and sccuri'
ti.s which protect other kinds Of property. Inc
Constitution recognizes it as property, and Congress-,
n. tho ,upre,ne legislative authority in tho territories
mus, guarantee to it oil the immunities OF property
Thus, il the STAKEHOLDER from tho South se''ies III i"
territory in which there is no adequate Pfotee''oh 10
his property against the violence OF the aboi'ioh'sts'
il becomes the duty OF Congress to interpose Tor hS
security. So, likewise, if there be any artificial bar
r;sr Of foreign law which rcpcls slavery from the
,onuon domain, Congress must intcrpose to remove
,ho ob,taclc. Hence, in 1850, tho present Secretary
If War. then O Senator from Mississippi, proposed
that Congress should repeal the Mexican laws which
prohibited slavery in Utah and New Me1ico-ro con-
tondinp, nevertheless. as wo do, that the Constitution
nroprio yigore effected their repeal, and carried slave
nv into the forbidden territory. Ii this principio Of
Congressional intervention is clear and indisputable,
rho limitation on its exercise is cqually.so Congress
NAV intervene in pursuance of the Constitution, not
against it. Congress may interpose TO further the
ends of Justice and equality, but not of wrong and
oppression. Congress muy interfere to protect slave
~ in tho territories, but not to prohibit 1t. Thisprin-
chile, which is tho doctrine Of Mr.. Calhoun and the
State Rights School, is clearly stated and conclusive
" though concisely argued, III the following para
graphs:
The territories Of the United States belong to the
soveral States composing this Union, ana are held ny
them as their Joint and common property.
Congress, IA the Joint agcnt and representative OF
thu States OF this Union, has no right 10 make any
law, or do any act whatever that shall directly, or by
;ts effects, make any discrimination between the
States of this Union, by which any Of them shall be
deprived Of it's full and equal right I" any territory OF
tho limited States, acquired or Ia be acquired.
Tho enactment of any law which should directly or
nv its effects deprive the citiacns OF any OF the Stntcs
OF this Union from eniiSratlng, WIN tnelt properly W.
~ any of the territories Of the United States, will make
inch discrimination, and would, therefore, he Il viola
ton of the Constitution, and the rights of tho States
from which such citizens cmigrated, and in deroga-
ton OF that perfect equality which belongs to them as
members Of this Union, and would tend directly to
subvcrt the Union itself.
SO much for tho doctrine Of Congressional non-in-
icrrention, which General Cass maintains without
ANY warrant the Constitution or in reason-which
tho State Rishts party disputes and dlscredlts by IRE
sistible argument and decisive authority.
1t is not necessary that 70 should refute the doc
trine of squattrr sorsrcigSty, which General C"as here
Hrserts with more precision of language and dogma.
t;sm of temper than no has heretofore vcnturod to