Weekly national intelligencer., 1854-04-08

nu oe slaves ana as such De here bought and sod
conversion TO Christianity after their impo
tation and argued from thence that ali Indisns a. wei
America rs esswhere not particularly excepted in that clans
might DO sold as slaves that the informed e
that he missated the law that there time nj ~
rod in the last century, when law was in existence bc
declared Indians with the people of this
when taken prisones that under that law many Inaian
made slaves and their continue slaves 10
but that this law was time after repealed from whc
period no American Indian could be sold slave and ta
all such as had been brought into this country since ha. tim
and who had sued for their freedom had uniformly
H that the counsel still insisted upon his former
men and considering the courts address the bar mis
direction to the jury had prayed this certificate be entere
at the foot of the Judgment" Judgment affirmed.
Upon what principle is this decision based Certain
upon the ground that Indians taken capves in cou
not be reduced to slavery except in of lie
gsatve act of the Colony of Virginia. and when that nc
was repealed leaving the law Of nature alone to its full
operaton they could longer be made slaves and al
who under such circumstances sued for their freedom
had uniformly recovered it, There is another case
the same volume which will weary the committe,
by reading In it the judge gives general resume of al
the laws which had been passed in the colony reference
to the enslavng of Indians and negroes showing incon
trovertaby that at that day slavery considered
rest entirely upon the positive laws which had been enact
cd to sustain and control it, and that there other
source to look to for its existence.
The next case bearing upon the point will cite from
the Kentucky Reports Of 1870 The question was raised
whether 1t was necessary for master claiming slave
who was admitted to have been brought from Delaware
to prove the existence of law in Delaware toeratnr
slavery Charles j. Boyle decided that was not neces.
sry but the ground upon which the decision was made
renders it applicable the point at ISSUE He says that
slavery was originally introduced into the Colonies by
regntatton-mark the word-of the mother country of
which the Of all the Colonies were equally bound
to take notice and what the Of the Colonies were
bound TO notice the courts of the States bound
know aud as such laws not repealed by the Revo
ution they must be presumed to exist until the contrary
shown thus leaving necessarily to infer that had
not been for the known law Of the State of Delaware
anterior to the Revolution the burden of have
been thrown upon the MASTER upon the principle that
the law of nature oil presumed to be free until
the contrary is shown 1t is well known principle that
the positive enactments of foreign Government must be
proven but that the laws of nature supposed to be
known and to govern in oil courts The of William
Wekham will be recognised at least by every Vrgnian,
as that OF lawyer whose opinion is entitled to the great
est weight And will conclude this array of American
authorities by quoting rcmark Of his reported in the
case OF Butt against Rachel in I'd Hennng and Mumford
1t was argueado, and is follows:
Mr. Writ contends that Indians pauray entitled to
freedoms so negroes. But this does prevent their
ing slaves admit the right to make them slaves must
pend on positive institution Our right is founded the
OF Assembly for the better of
Thus where it was to the interest OF his have
maintained the natural right to hold human beings as
slaves he comedies the point and bases it. where alone
con ever stand upon the positive municipal regulation of
each particular State or Government think sir have
demonstrated that the law Of nature will carry
slavery into the Territories of Nebraska and Kansas or
maintain aud protect it when there Southern gentlemen
need not Y.'
clay that fattering uncon to their sous"
proceed now to show that quite little in that
spect is to be expected from the Constitution Of the United
Sates That blessed instrument will protect slavery and
the rights OF Shareholders wherever it exists Wherever
the municipal laws of any State Territory recognises
1t It's broad @gs will be extended over it; but it is power
less to estabish ad whatever may be the sentiments Of
the North as to the extension of slavery proud and
happy to believe that majority there are willing and
ready to do all that may become them preserve and
force the guarantees which, Shareholders
nnHa ~ ynlas
that the Constitution Of the United States authorizes and
establishes slavery in its Terrtores 1t s Ibelieve al
ways placed the ground that the Territories the
common property of the whole Union purchased in some
instances with the blood and sometimes with the
common treasure of a and that be governed
as to exclude any interest herefo There seems to be
some pausibiity in this argument Let us examine it.
II tits true at al ought to apply to all the
domain, and Congress has right dispose of
to make it inaccessible any great interest in the
country. -
But what is the fact upon this subject! The Govern
ment owns millions of of land in precisely this
CORY which lies within the limits of States which she her
self has created and from which the STAKEHOLDER with his
slave property as much excluded he is from the soil
OF England. No man from any quarter of tho Union
complains that the public lands lying within the State of
Illinois are precluded from slave settlement; and yet,
upon the principle contended for the public domain in
that State belongs much the Southern the North
ern man. and ought to be free settlement by him
with his property to any citizen Of the United States
The true prncpe sir conceive to be this: the public
land property wherever it lies belongs to the General
Government and is the common property of all to be
used enjoyed and appropriated in subordnation to the
municipal law which prevails it, In the State Of Il
linois this municipal law-making power resides in the
State Government in the Territories it resides in the
General Government in both it is supreme and is always
to be distinguished from the ownership OF the soil It
makes no difference that the supreme municipal power
and the ownership of the soil is lodged in the nd
vdua as is the in the Territories They
tally distinct and must forever remain so The
lates to property the other to Individuals and the is
subordinate to and under the control of the other.
There another view Of this matter which think quite
conclusive. Slavery, by the decision Of the Supreme
Court of the United States, is municipal law is de-
pendent for its existence upon the law of the particular
place, which law is not merely decaratory of natural
right but is supposed to be enacted with reference to the
interests Of those to be affected by it. Now those who
say that the constitution of the United States will carry
slavery into any territory upon the ground that the ter
rory Is common property must further contend for the
same reasons that Congress has right abolish it
therein because if they have the right they might
init that injustice upon the South which Southern gen.
emen say the constitution protects them FROM We then
have this melancholy dilemma in which the people of the
Territories will be placed They have municipal law
which ought to have reference alone tho happiness and
the interests OF those TO be governed by it. fixed upon
them, without their consent and absolutely rrepeaable
by any power on earth, matter what exgcncy might
arise to demandt This, submit, is redueo ad a6snr
dlm No principle Of free Government which places any
people in such dilemma be recognised.
If the proposition just stated be correct its converse
also must be true and gentlemen who admit that Con-
gress has the right TO egsate upon the subject Of sa
very in the Territories compelled to abandon the po
son that the constitution proprio would carry that
institution and establish it there.
But sir, even if the constitution Of the United States