Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-02-11

But then Us now, there slave interest in the
try; them as now there slave power The interest
comparatively small and the power comparatively
weak but they sufficient under the then existing
to defeat the proviso and transfer the great
question OF slavery to future discussion The facts which
have detailed however sufficient to show what was
the general sentiment and what was the original policy
OF the country in respect to slavery 1t of lm-
tation, discouragement repression
What next occurred? The subject of organizing this
Territory remained before Congress Mr. jefferson in
1855, went to France his great influence was no longer
felt IN the councils of the country but his provso
mained and in 1887 incorporated into the ordinance
for the of the territory northwest Of the river
Ohio beg the Senate to observe that this territory
at that moment the whole territory belonging to the
United States will not trouble the Senate by reading
the provso of the ordinance is enough say that
the Jefferson provso of 1884, coupled with the provision
saving to the original States Of the Union right to
claim ugives from service incorporated into the
ordinance, and became fundamental law every foot
Of national territory What the policy indicated by
this action by the fathers Of the Repubc Was it that
OF indiHerentsm between slavery and freedoms that OF
establishing geographical line, side Of which
there should be liberty and the other side slavery,
both equally under the protection and countenance of the
Government No. sir the furthest thing possible from
that 1t the policy of excluding slavery from oil ma
tional territory was adopted too under remarkable
circumstances. The territory which it was estab-
shed was claimed by Virginia, in right of her charter
and in right of conquest The gallant George Rogers
Clark of the brayest and nobest sons Of that State
thory, invaded and conquered the territory Slavery
already there, under the French colonial law and
also if the claim of Virginia well founded under the
laws Of that State These facts prove that the first app
cation Of the original policy of the Government
slave territory into free territory
Now, sir what guarantees given for the maintcn
ance Of this policy in time to come? once upon this
attention as, in my Judgment its Importance deserves
While the Congress framing this ordinance
the last act of its usrious laborshs convention which
framed the Constitution was sitting in Philadelphia.
Several gentlemen members Of both bodies and ut the
time this ordinance adopted proposition in respect
slavery had been discussed in the convention
that which resulted in the establishment Of the three
hs clause 1t is impossible to say, with absolute
tanty that the incorporation Of that clause into the Con-
sttuton which gave the slave States representative for
Of their slaves had any thing do with the
unanimous vote by which the proviso ngrafted
the ordinance; but the coincidence is remarkable and
uses the inference that the facts connected At
all events the proyiso hardly fail have been
garded afordng guaranty for the perpeuation OF
the policy which it established.
Already of the original thirteen States had taken
measures for the abolition Of slavery within their limits
and were regarded as free States Six only Of the org
nal States regarded slave States The ordinance
provided for the creation of five free States and thus
secured the decided acendency Of the free States in the
Confederation The perpetuation Of slavery in any
State it is quite obvious not then even thought Of
Sir let ask the attention Of the Senate the Cons
tuition itself That charter Of our Government not
formed upon prosavery principles but upon slavery
principles 1t nowhere recognises any right Of property
in nowhere confers upon the Government which
it creates any power establish to continue slavery
Mr. Madison himself records in his report of the debate
of the Convention his declaration that it wrong
admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be
property in Every clause in the Constitution which
refers in any way to slaves speaks of them persons and
excludes the idea of property In of the States
is true, slaves were regarded as property.
The language of Mr.. Justice Mclean on this point is
very striking. He says:
That dives them of the leading and controlling
quality of persons by which they designated in the Con-
suon The character of property is given them by the
local law This law respected and all fights under it
protected by the Federal authorities But the Constitution
acts upon slaves as persons and not as property"
Well sir not only was the idea of property in men
euded from the Constitution only there pow
granted to Congress to authorize enable any to
hold another as property, but amendment after
wards ngrafted upon the Constitution which especially
denied all such power.
The history of that amendment is worth attention The
State which the Senators from Virginia ably represent
this floor Of those which, immediately after thu
adoption of the Constitution proposed amendments Of 1t
One of the amendments which she proposed was this:
"No freeman ought to be taken improned deprived
freehold liberties franchises, outawe6 eailed
in any deprived of his life liberty property but b.
the law of the land .s.r
adopted and proposed to the States very different amend
ment 1t was this: @.s
"No person shall be deprived Of life, liberty, OF
property without due process Of law"
Now sir in my Judgment this prohibition was intended
comprehensive guaranty Of personal freedom, and
denies absolutely to Congress the power Of legsatng for
the establishment and maintenance of slavery. This
amendment Of ITSELF rightly interpreted and applied
would be sufficient to prevent the introduction OF slaves
into any territory acquired by the United States. At ell
events taken in connexion with the ordinance and with
the original provision of the Constitution it shows
cusivey the absence Of all intention upon the part Of the
founders Of the Government to afford any countenance
protection to slavery outside of State limits Departure
from the Interpretation Of the Constitution has created
the necessity for more positive prohibition.
My general view upon this subject is simply this Sla
very the objection of to the absolute disposal
Of another by force Master and slave according to
the principles of the Declaration Of Independence and by
the law of nature alike men, endowed by their Crea
tor with equal rights Sir Mr. Pinckney right when
in the MARYLAND House Of Delegates he exclaimed
the eternal principles of justice in the State has
right hold his slave for single hour Slavery then
exists nowhere by the law Of nature Wherever it exists
municipal or State legislation.
Upon this state of things the Constitution acts 1t
cocnses all men as persons it confers power; but
on the contrary expressly denies all power the Govern
Congress has no power under the Constitution to
make slave than to make king more power to
establish slavery than to establish the Inquisition.
At the same tims the Constitution coners power
Congress- but the contrary, denies all power to in
terfere with the internal policy Of any State sanctioned
and established by its constitution and its lcgis
laton in respect to the personal relations OF its nhnb
tants The States under the Constitution absolutely
free from all interference by Congress in that respect
except perhaps in the case Of insurrecton and
may egslate they please within the limitations Of
their constitution. They may allow slavery IL they please
just they may cence other wrongs. But State laws
by which slavery is allowed and regulated can operate
only within the limits of the State and have
territorial effect.