New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-02-13

he does not understand The Judiciary Commit
tee have undertaken to ndorse the illogical yisws
advanced from the bench by Judge Kane In the
last acones Of the Psssmore Williamson case, and
which Justly objected him TO the ridicole OF the
Philadelphia bar and the legal profession through
out the country. Mr.. Montgomery will share no
better fate. In the discussion of this question, u
would have been more manly had the judiciary
Committee pointed out in precise terms the rela.
tons which exist between the States forming the
American Union and other sovereign States, and
bow the laws OF nations apply 10 the former. The
States Of this Union possess no one element Of
sovereignty upon which the laws Of nations can
act, and this Mr. Montgomery should know. Ths
Constitution Of the United States strips the States
Of every vestge Of external sovereignty, and
transfers il TO the Government of the Union. The
States can have no intercourse with foreign na-
tons and consequently it is misnomsr to alegs
that the laws of nations regulate the domestic In
tercoursc between the States.
But, supposing the separate States do stan1
in the same relation TO each other as England and
France or England and the United States, 1t wiz
necessarily follow that the laws Of nations which
govern the latter, apply with equal force to the
former. To any nation which stands before tho
world as sovereign and undergraduates capable for
forming alliances, entering into treaties and doing
those things which independent States may
of right do-the general laws Of nations apply.
But even the law of nations cannot override the
public policy and statutes Of any particular STATE
or Kingdom. Thus, while the foreign Slave trade
was recognized as lawful and legitimate by all the
civilized world, except America, England de-
nounced il as wicked and barbarous, and declared
that Slavery should not exist on her soil. Perhaps
Mr.. Montgomery will plead the laws Of nations aS
justification for the transit of slaves through En-
gland or her possessions. II sovereign nation
chooses to allow the transit OF persons and prop
erty through its territory, It may do so; but the
right is not derived from the laws of nations. but
IL. a.1t Ia NALL
may be changed and modified at any time. En-
gland is an example as TO the right Of transit Of
slave property and any of the States on the
Continent will furnish an example as to the righe
of transit free locomOtiOn OF persons, without
the consent Of the local Government. There Is no
principle better established than that every nation
il sovereign within the limits of its own territory.
except so far the rights Of the nation may have
been parted with by treaty stipuatons. 1t Is OBJ
vous, therefore, that Mr.. Montgomery is mis-
taken in his conclusions in applying the laws OF
nations TO the States Of this Union. There is no
"comity' between sovereign States which compels
one to sacrifice its policy to another, or all tho
| rest under stress Of the laws Of nations. The
laws of nations simply imply code by which tho
| powerful agree to be governed; If any State does
not assent to the CODE then it is not observed By
that nation except as it may be coerced by other
nations.
But Mr.. Montgomery is q Democrat Of tho
strict Instruction school, and he should have 70
ferred to those parts of the Federal Constitution
which authorize the Federal Government to de-
clare the general right of transit for slaves through
the respective States of this Union. But, In just
ice to Mr.. Montgomery, | must say he has ro-
ferred to one provision Of the Constitution to sus-
| tain ht view of the question which cuts lik Q
| twoedged sword. lie says the right is ratified
| and confirmed by the Constitution, more espe-
| cially in the clause which reserves 10 Congress
"Me egciusire right to regulate commerce among ne
| States" This is coming to point. HCongress.
under this provision of the Constitution has power
| to regulate commerce among the States, and thus
secure the right Of transit for slave property, in
| the enactment of the law the right may be with
| held. The mode Of regulating commerce and the
details of the law left to the discretion OF Con-
| gross, and as that respectable body have not YET
| exercised the power, Mr.. Montgomery would do
| we'll to base his pretensions on something moro
| substantial. Besides, Mr.. Montgomery does in
| Justice to himself. The friends Of Freedom ex-
| pect to blot out the slave traffic between the
States by the authority contained in the provision
| Of the Constitution referred to by him; nor VIII
| bis Southern friends thank him for placing thu
| right of transit for their property upon such pre-
| carious grounds. They deny that Congress has
any such power under the Constitution and have
fought the question since the Slavery excite-
| ment commenced If the power exists, as Mr..
| Montgomery asserts it does, then State laws may
be anDued providing for the transit OF slave prop
| erty whenever Congress shall prohibit tho domes-
| tic slave trade: and this will be delightful news
| for Southern men to hear from an avOwed cham
| pioh of their rights. Such is the absurdity
| preached by Northern doughfaces.
In the plenitude OF bis wisdom, Mr.. Montgomery
continues his argument thus; 1.-The question OF
"prOperty is of referred to the tocss N quo
| "Of the alleged owner The Constitution declares
THAT the citizens OF each State shall be entitled
| "to all privileges and immunities Of citizens in thS
"ssveral States and will any Pennsylvania deny
| his own right to pass with his property over and
along the public highways Of Virginia" have
| no doubt Mr. Montgomery pumes himself upon
| the above sentences as unanswerabe, and truo
construction Of the Constitution. Now slave prop
| erty, it should be remembered, is not like othcr
| property. 1t possesses two characters: slave 10
person well property, and in all Free states
this species of property is allowed to pass through
the territory Of Free States, by perinssion, tho
local law governs exclusively as to whether such
"psrsons" shall have the right of transit or not.
II will not surely be cOntended by Mr. Montgom-
cry that citizen of Virginia has greater rights N
PENNSYLVANIA than native citizens, and yet bis con-
struction Of the Constitution would allow them 70
] him. il is not clear from the report whether Mr.
Montgomery believes that State has the right -
abolish Slavery within its borders or not, although
be applies the laws of nations 10 them, which ~
| high evidence Of sovereignty. In speaAn"s oi ING
| Emancipation Act OF 1850, and the Supplement- o.
| les Mr. Montgomery says the latter recognizes
| the prior right Of persons, with their domestic
| slaves to pass through and sojourn In this state
| for ak months The "prior right here referred
10 il intended to convey the idea that the right Of
transit is derived from the Federal Constitution.
and the laws Of nations but il is manestly derived
from State authority. II a citizen Of the State
has no right to hold slaves, nor demand the right
| i l.. ~ l..