New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-01-15

Slavery northwest Of the Otio with the fugitive
cisu,e Of the Federal c Constitution, and thus AID
weight to the obi ga'ion. alleged to be imposed
by that clause is rot original With Mr.. Curtis
Tat idea vas first started y Mr.. Benton In the
fr,t volume Of bis Tbify Years in the Ssns'e.
Mr.. Deut,n sr-ues, or rather silt Is-tOr he IS
apt 20 ceal more IN positive assertions thsn IN
suggestions or arguments-tbas the rejection OF
Nj Jefferson. Ordinance of l9-i. sai the delay,
up to -. TO pass any other, grew oot e. all out
Of a1y objection on the part of the South to Mr.
Jefer,ou. ADti-Slavery clause, but wholly from
tbe fact thai the Ordinance contained no Pro7sion
for the return Of slaves escaping into the new
Territory. The precise words which be uses are
90 follows:
Ike ,taa; he 'euh OoJ delayed ve'e 'o TIE All.
is, .tc.,tras ln-vfs s-sV.-. Asso g. thss ~a'
a1c,c tos ihe ,sc ssn for i1 oo-ance re. Va
s.tufia . Emit 4f Thirty ieIrs Jiec 10
TIl. ides ot Mr. Benton is appropriated by
Mr Curtis il the above extract. Tneglory q
nail, claimed by Mr. Webster for Mr. Dane. Of
having been the al hor OF the Anti Slavery clause
of the Ordinance OF l7s7. it i. difficult ii not m-
possible to maintain sgainst his recla nations on
behalf Of Nr. Jefer,on, made By Nc Benton,
Dir. Coles and others. But Mr. Curtis would
indemnify Mr. DHe for this lo,s By claiming for
him tire in his opinion probably erestsr goryo OF
having been he Original supporter Of tue fugitive
clause in the Fetersl Constitution Wei may
we eyclaim with De,demons. d" O. mos, lame sad
"impo'ent conclusion" Mr. Dane. according
to al accounts was very sEsid and quiet
man yet Ne cannOi bus fancy him moving
uEta,uy in bis grave, and muttsrmG after the
Spanish proveIb-Save NE from my friends Ii
u ere be any truth in the motive power Of late
a,cib 81 to spirits, Nr. Curtis may veil Look
cut for b-ick5ss.
The orig asl attempt on the par! Of Dir. Benton
to 1--WE emphssis" 20 me fugitive cause in the
CoI,tlrutoL by connecting it @itn the prohibition
Of Slavery north of tae Olio, gave occasion to
some obseryat ons 10 review Of Mr.. BensOn's
book published in several sue ,e-sve numbers OF
The TRGUNE OF M,y lsst. As Mt. cur1s seems
row, from de anticipated portion OF bis book
published in The Boston Daily 1dreriis,r. TO have
stepped into Mr. BentOn's shoes, aud to have ap-
proprated bis thunder without So much as saying
"by your leave, the reply originally Bsie to Mr.
Benton becomes equally applicable 10 him, and we
accordingly proceed TO quote from H. At'erpoIn'-
i1g out curious change in thetextOfMr. Webster's
Reply 70 HsyDe (n which speech Mr. Danes au-
ihorsl ip oftbe Anti-Slayery csuse Olthe Ordinance
ofl7,7 was first put forward, a change made for
the fret time, aud without any allusion to the
fact y at il Rad been made ia Mr.. Edward Ever
ott's edition OF Webster Works but which obvi-
ates one of the criticisms which Nr. Benton, IN
bic Thirty Year. View, bad made. upon th;t
sp.ech. the Article referred to proceeds as
follows:
The other III stake Of Mr. Webster, that con-
tanG m bis socond speech in which he ascrIbes The
defeat Of Mr. Jehersous Ant-Sayery provision and
the delay in adopting It, as re-prOposed by Mr. hns'
TO rs M IRE TO obtain the ,uppo Of niue States, still
sta1ds uncorccfcd, an omission the more 10 be Ia
meIicd as this missatemont has ealy misled sey-
ersl historical srcrs, and, account Il Mr. Veg
s,or reputation 90 coLs; u'ionel lawyer, viii be
lkel, to mi.lead mony more. And yet, by change
NOT more material, aud Dot much mo-e extensive.
than that made in the previous speech this error
ml ht also have been go rid Of aud the claim for the
North and for Massachusetts in particular, to the
/, uor Of the AniiSlavery prohibition, sill have been
LETT 10 stand on ground quite az suong, to say the
least "a that on which Mr.. Webster had originally
placed il. The passage Of thai prohibition INFO aw
g.w out Of its Ieproposal by Mr. King, Of Massachu-
sot,e-Mr. Jefersons attempt having proved a fail
me-Ior was it till after eight States, more han
the requisite lumber, and Of which Maryland
ore bad .iguifed disposition to assen, to this pro-
hbtor Of slavery that Mr. King and his colleagues
proceeded 10 execute the cesson which they were
ihorized TO make Of the claims 81 Ms'sa,husetts -
the North western Territory. As finally embodied
by Mr. Dane, icto the Ordinance of 1857, the p'ohl-
biiion even preseLted in such snape that.
though more peremptcry, in point Of time than Nr.
Jtfftnols original proposition, it Ut obtained the
votes Of tie four sou.herEm - Staes, GoOr-
ca. the Carolinas and Virginia. which had
before 1T all times voted in body agans;
Il. This uranmify-eycry Safe 10 the Union
having thus, fir, or last, assented to it-gaye
t. the Prohibition OF Slavery solid and per.
manent character, which it never would have pos
sessed lad it been carried under the Articles Of the
Confederation il might have been, by the votes OF
oul, the seven Northern State by which it was ia
vored from the beginning and to whose perse' erance
the aor Of r.. adoption may still be very reasonably
sscIibod. And this may serve 10 explain fact
pointed out by Mr. Benton appearing TIE Jour
rsl that although during the interval OF i've days be
tween tie striking out OF Mr. Jetf-rsons Anti.Savery
Prohibition from he resolutions which he had offered
al the adoption OF those resolutions thus mrtstel
a stcond delegate from New-Jersey appeared OF the
floor thus enabling that State 10 vote. NJ attempt,
however was made to revive Jefferson Prohibition
though the Northern States, by the arrival Vi this
NcwJcfsey Member had votes enough 70 have car
RED tie Prohibition Of Slavery without any help