Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1856-06-25

! its condition should be changed BY the positive
enactment Of competent Legislative authority.
! He further asserts that slavery was forbidden in
the new territories. acquired. by the soil. eli
mate and character Of the productions. and this,
taken in conjunction with the character Of the
emigran,s rushing TO til. country. who were
mostly from the Middle and Northern States.
would soon settle the quesiion--against slavery
of course. He states that the practical result
would be the same whether Congress should ad-
opt the Wilmot proyiso. the Missouri Compro-
mise, the Clayton Compromise or resolve to do
nothing He moreover assumes that this settle
ment thus made by the laws Of Mexico. the laws
of nature and the will of the people-whioh Of
course would be against slavery--woud be a
! final one, "because possess more territory
10 mhieh the question can be at all applicable"
He therefore calls upon the democratic free
sellers to rally with the rest of the party in sup
port Of the principles and candidate Of The party:
thus repudatng the idea that their free soil
afiini,ies unfit them for association with the rest
of the party, or render them untrue To its prin-
| ciples. He expresses great respect for the feel
! ings of the democratic free. sellers in his own
state. and bears testimony to their intelligence
and devotion TO the great and glorious principles
| Of the party Connect this speech with his other
! speech the treaty for the anne xaton of Texas,
/ published yesterday, in which he expresses his
strong objections to the extension Of the Union
over new slave. holding territory, and comes to
tho conclusion to support the annexation Of Texas
as it will not extend The dominion Of slavery. and
also expresses tho opinion that slavery cannot
exist in farming country which produces only
wheat, rye and corn, aud what is the conclusion
TO be drawn from his endorsement of the Cincin-
natl platform No candid man can doubt that
MIR. Buchanan looks upon tho question of slavery
IN Kansas and Nebraska as n mere abstraction,
question already settled by the laws of nature,
resulting from soil, climate. and tho character of
the productions. against slavery and in favor of
free soil, which settlement remains only to be
confirmed by the will Of tho cmigrants pouring
into that country from tho free states and foreign
countries, under the doctrine of squatter soyer.
eighty 40 distinctly and unequivocally recognized
in his letter Of acceptance. Mr. Buchanan there
fore is but acting out the spirit Of bis own sug
gestions TO the free soil democracy of Pennsylva-
mia in 1913. Nay more, is not Mr.. Buchanan
now sustaining the Nebraska-kanses bill be.
! cause no thinks with General Pierce. It j. IN
proposition in favour Of freedom ?n
Some weeks ago, We laid down the proposition
that the great. vital, pressing and practical point
in the contest the South is waging foris full and
equal rights in the union and under the oonstitu-
tion was tho privilege gifts citizens to migrate
with their slaves into any territory belonging to
the United States, and there hold aud use them,
under the protection of tho federal authorities and
government, just as the elnigrant from Maine
might carry there his horse his steam engine, or
any other property, and in like manner possess
and use them. until the people in lawful convon-
ton should determine to dispense with that spc-
cies of property. We maintained that all local
laws existing in such territory prior TO its eeqnis
ton by the United States were abrogated by its
subIection to u new government, and Tint go in
stdni when that acquisition and subsection oc-
Cured, the laws aud constitution of the Union
were thrown over il, and that any citizen of any
State might at once go with his property, of any
description, into The territory acquired and
claim the protection of the federal authorities
We illustrated our meaning more distinctly Ivy
asserting thai il Canada (whero slavery Ia now
prohibitcd) were 10 become Territory of tho
Uuited Staies, it would be as much the property
of Virginia ~ Of Massachu tts-and that tho
citizen of Virginia would hive an equal right
with the citizen of massachusetts TO transfer his
residence and property to it. If this be not so,
there is no such thing as State equality, and the
North is permitted privileges which arc denied
tho South. If this be not 80, il is gross impos-
ture, an idle humbug TO talk about tho equality
and sovereignty of the different members OF the
confederacy-thc constitutional rights of the
South become n deluson and n cheat, and the
/ Northern States elevated into position aud
privileges superior to those of the South. Yet,
mons,rous would be this conclusion; arrogant,
insulting and nsufferable as is the pretension;
III precisely what Mr.. buchanan meant when
! he declared that slavery could not go into chi.
ifornia New Mexico without positive enact
ment, by competent authority, establishing it
! there.
II is worry easy to see how statesman enter
tcrtaining the opinion that slavery can only exist
by virtue Of statute egalizng il might conclude
that the Wilmot Proylso is unnecessary that the
| Missouri Compromise could DO dispensed with
| and that the Kansas Nebraska bill could be as
scented to, because wholly imperative and mpoteni
for the extension of slavery. He could not fail to
perceive that if the STAKEHOLDER had to wait for the
non STAKEHOLDER to invite him BY law to come into
a territory, such invitation would never be
given and the territory would remain forever free
There need be no Wilmot Proviso nor Missouri
restriction, prohbhingth she introduction Of slaves
when the absence OF law establishing slavery ii
prohibition of itself. There is nothing to be
feared by tho North from the clause in the Kan
sas Nebraska bill authorizing the people of the