New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-08-12

The journals and speakers opposed to Fremont
and DAYTON rest their cause on the potency OF
cpithets and damaging incu'pstions. They call u'
BLACK Republicans" because we resist the dark
enpp of the fair face of Kansas with gangs Of black
bondnen, chooens to preserve it as the home aud
patrmopy Of white freemen. They call US obs
unionsts," though we resist the policy and the
power of the Nuhferp, ana iosist on the perpetua.
tion Of the Union through the maintenance of the
principles of its founders. 1t cannot be denied that
the policy of excluding Slavery by posi- i've law was
fret proposed by Thomas Jefferson 10 l7s4-hardly
more than year after our Independence vas
secured-cOncurred in at once BY majority Of the
Delegates from the States thtn holding slaves, and
finally adopted in 1877 by the Delegates from all
the States, Georgia and South Carolina included.
This policy the ensuing Federal Congress
approved and ratified, and the act which
enbOdies the exclusion Of Slavery from
all the then Federal Territory bears the ap-
prov signature of George Washington. We
do not threaten DIsuuiOn, even if this policy,
since relaxed, should now be subvetsd; but we
verge of our constitutional power. On the other
hand, our adversaries have repeatedly proclaimed,
AID still proclaim, in Congress ard elsewhere,
that, sfould we succeed 10 bringing back the Gov
trl ment TO the policy of Slavery Restriction de-
vised BY Jefferson and approved by Washington,
they will break up the Union: and Mr. Fillmore
in effect iDdOises and justi6es this tra,torous
threat; and, while Cotton Conservatism has no
rebuke for these factonists it accuses vs. OF favor
ing Disunion Can charges 80 groundless mis-
lead the Amt rican people
But it is said that we SANDER our adversaries
in charging them with favorine Slavery Extension.
This is serious accusation: let US ties. it's
truth or falsebOod.
We freely admit at the outset that our opponents
do not propose the legal Compulsion Of any slave
holder to take his humsn caattes into any Federal
Territory: all they demand ia that there shall be
no legal impediment to bis taking them there and
holding them astlaves therein sad thenceforth. AS
they hold, the absence Of any law repeling or for
bidding Slavery in the Federal Territories allows it
to 20 thither, and entities it, once there, to the
protection ard support of the lsws This has for
some years been accredited az sound COnstitu-
tona doctrine by Sou bern dsbaters and poll
ticiaDs it has recently been accepted and
affirmed by Northern also. The very frs;
distinct affirmation of it by any nan living in
Free State was made by the Hon. Richard BrOd
head, United ates Senator from pennsy lvsaa, in
speech TO a Democratic Convention a. EastOn,
Pa in August Of last year; but ii has since re-
tba NJ N iii I0ia If
precious faith. Thus Mr.. J. Clancy Joees Of
PenDsy lvaria, the immediate friend and champion
Of Mr. Buchanan in the House, end one Of the
abb at and most state Inablike Of his Northern sup
port, rs. thus d, f0td his position 10 a speech on
The fuor last Winter:
ain nv opinion, the Const uton limits the power of
Con ertss the extent Of prohibiting them either from
ESTABLISHING or db0iSh7ng Slavery in the Territories
AC uniting I. AT view 20 be correct sufpese it Slows
mater of cOurst, that the Constitution OF the
United States coDftrs Up,n the reoe o. tie Territory
right 10 dasPossessaay mano ms r!SA topFHlerfy
whether it he SLAVE any otber property. And
the refore the Legislative Council. OF TenItOry,
though they may pass lave regulating the disposal and
protec OF property hare no ragh 10 50 dds'nisr
tho lars as 10 eStd6sh or dbosh the !ight 10 n0lo
that property"
This is to-day the accepted doctrine Of tho party
supporting Mr. Buchanan for President; it is that
a.o of large majority of the party which supports
Mr.. Fillmore. There are individuals supporting
either of these candidates. who do not accept it, but
cling to Mr. Clays view that Slavery can legally 60
nowhere unless preceded and protected by posture
law; but no great National party but that support
ipg Col Fremont now openly affirms and upholds
this doctrine Mr. Warner Of Georgia most clearly
20. forth the new conservative doctrine as 1t is
affirmed aud maintained throughout the South, in
tis ,pee ch in the House last Winter, as follows:
- sbaU maintain ind undert AXE to establish that
tbe title of nv constituents TO their slave property /,
not based uop any posit law ef the State, but that
IL rests for s foluOatiOn upon the utiversA law OF
nations which recognized slaves Is properly before
and at the time of the adoption OF the Constitution.
Tsat before and at the time Of the adopt N OF the
Constitution the citzeas of the State OF Georga->
tbe same being sovereign, independent State-had
the u1doubted right according to the well established
ripciplts of ine national law, TO take their SLAVE
rroperfy into any foreign territory, provided there
WA DO sw in that foreign territory prohibiting Its IN
reduction there ana to have il protected in such for
ecn territory that the law of nations was adopted as
q part Of the cotumon law IN the original thirteen
state, constituting part of the law of the lard be-
ore and at the time Of the adoption Of the Federal
Constitution"
This is now the chosen position Of the patty sup
porting Mr.. Buchanan for Presldent-it is that
which tie new pabks inserted at Cibcinasti in the
Democratic National Platform were attended to
cover AL affirm. The affirmation therein that the
people Of Territory, when having sufficient pop
ulation, that Territory is Transformed into State,
may exclude or prohibit Slavery, is a clear impi-
that they cannot do 30 at any earlier period