Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1856-12-19


| Mi Blair thought that social ias va, .
Tor cou,is Of practice md lie couteuded nn He
OF tie former ruling Of the courts ths, H. Sroy he
not be entitled tc all the privileges Of cj,irn ne.,
Judge Il sion stat tlF there has been M i,"p.-
peel NJ ne general principle Of common s.r re,
birth mites cl;lze nshp. Indeed the Act n, - ut
souri, Legislature Of 1915 expressly VIC go
negroes citizens, ana declares that non rs ass
there who are not declared by other stat,s o. me
Ztns. o. GIG
u; me mex; question was me consttuonsli.y Of tina
constitution OF Illinois il, and Under il ,h n; 49, r"e
entitled TO his freedom unless forfeited go; "'n.
I" Missouri The Declaration OF Independence =. "a
chres ioery 10 De one OF those rights which ar, -
alenabe, and are we 10 be tod the, a n. ORC b.
act OF his own can abrogGte this act He cited
cases bearing on the subj, Ct. and said that
Scott OF Missouri, WAS TIE iirst man o. this com,
10 lhn out tilat tbe plaintiff had aeneted his liba
anu was maze slave a!au. Il was settled poin,
III tne common law OF Missouri even before her adj.
mission into the Union, but it wa. not law nm, ns.s
and politics that had nv AIDED judge Srn,t's mind 7,
was poiit IN The common law which the court Wa.
called upon Ia decide upon genor. rrincinIss and !,
was not bound 10 consider Jucs, Scot noinn no.
than any other excep. tor weight and LEARNING JJa
alluded 10 point in his opponents brief ina, n,
Emerson must be regarded person in ,ransitn
and said there is evidence tina, he had rrsd.nca
other than the pl, where lie WAS found fur yh.n he
returned TO Missouri he did so 10 Jefferson barracks
any relation of which confcrs emancipation.
|! a man took negro 10 illinois under the know.
ledge that he thereby became FREE aud cannot be held
he intended To violate The ew which prohibits slave.
ry or involuntary s-rvude. A. I" the Constitution.
atty y. the Missouri Compromise he with the cuun.
try, had entire confidence in the decisions OF this
court. Whichever side OF the line il might decide,
was indIt;-I cnt Ia hlr. a proposition made by
Congress in 1850 10 the STATES Tor a general ces-
sion of land for the purpose 0f general admins
u le trl Oin h.nf kIFaf
10 be sod SECOND, for the appointment of temporary
governments; snt third, for IeIr admission States
under that ac', ce.sions were Made by Virginia and
other States.
In 1874 tle resolution was c:.ercd by JEFF rson ex
Guiding slavery from iEr land cca-d Some States
being no; rep esente, il did pass bu' su sequ-nt-
~, 1857, it did pass In 100 Mr. King when 70.
viewing Jehrrsoms morton. ssd that Congress had
all Ee"iiri power opass fa"s mi i"gulrivns "r tue
government OF 4 Territory. lnl. would Authorize
he e'..ctm, of n Law prohibiting slavery. The
Coat Ina affirm I'll ,nnt t"- act ot lIS9 rr-enscted
TIA OF l7S'. And by he St section ct me M'ssou'
ri re-, slavery was pruhJ .gd north at 30 ~.
1h-r- dount W "u..hr SUBJECT I'LL the In
rert;on. .ruatrr SAVER ignry ,wch he thought wss
the f.. her Uf msny anomalies. The GLANCE Com.
iitee OF San FrnI csro, for instance, YVES AN ilies
mate exercise OF squstter row, rtiCnty. lne S'in
prom SO Act of 1885, spirit. !! rot language re at
firms the Of lS45, prohibiting slavery IN Texas
north nf tnr IN, for It says: Nothing saal. % in'
Piled To invalidat-," Sc.
Without concluding ". Blair gave way for an ad-
joU; nuieut
The case vii! occupy savera! days.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
WASH NGrnN, De-. IL -Af'e~ tho ~ @dg'ng OF t~o
mirror cases, he argument W., rrsn'. q in Inc case
of bred Scott ". Sanford. H. y. u Yer Tor tDe
clannut took the h-ost groun thai an African was
not capable nl icing mgGr ac..,Z'' 80 IL has oeeu
held by the Courts in ngmDe" % cases, and al The
time nj the adoption Of the constitution every stats
except one ~ The .inv.h";d'ug STATES held that no
could MOI; The Convention Tor The adoption OF the
con.tiru ion lei, %: the African slave trade for
;wru:y years. To hi- nmG, II Was not the intention
If lhe i-napr, q! thn, instrument 10 make al im.
portaton vi material Tor ell e'sh'p
The law of Mis siuri eays:-'lf negro come with
naturalization papers from another STATE he shall not
b. whipped" The law don't recognize him rs
citizen II master carries ,hve into State
where slavery does net exist, aud the slave has not
been discharged by the local iaw, and lie fakes him
back to S.sa where slavery i. established, the lat
ter |. not bound Ia "nt"c" the law OF the other
State, or exact the fort iture mpo'rd
He denied thar Judge Scott was the first to deny
tina, . slave wn. emnncps;ed by residence in free
State II had been decided everywhere that Tho
mers temporary residence IT master IN non.
savehoding State does not einancipate the save
lie referred 10 the constitution OF Illinois, which ha
understood WAS intended IA intrrdct tie Legislature
from, by law establishing slavery and nor to affect
transitu slaves. In the case of Nassachusetis vs.
Aines the slave was released by hnbeas corput, and
not by the Laws of the State. SO III the case OF IT,
nois, there was no physical legal or moral compul'
sion agaiust u slave passing through the State.
He thought when We examine the question ~
precedents recognize the right Of Congress 10 esisb
sh municipal governments in H. terrItories lie
denied that mere had been any Judicial decision al
Iowi-y them 10 go beyond this. The remarkable
fact the nvery attempt 10 .gsae on slavery was not
under the Constitution hat under the pretence OF
compact. The act of IDS and others were not AZ
exertinn of power To iahb slavery, but an exercise
;.l
nze the existence C slavery BY local law and protect
IL. gaYe history of the passage Of tho Missouri
Co,npr,mi.. which only passed under the pres.
sure of circumstances. To enable the admission %.
Maine Ia take place. III. thought the South there
being time for discussion, surrendered II for the
sake of peace, without considering the question ou
the ground OF cons;utionali;y. Mr. Geyer entered III.
10 a long auineut in ,ro the doctrine ut az after
sovereignty stating that in i; The people were RESI-
ug what 4 resistedi in the revolution--ihe omGro
tent power of Legislation, and cuntrndng that nothing
he found III the Constitution or decisions Of the Su.
pr.me Court conferred supreme, unlimited power over
the Territories On Congress.
He denied tho pcopl. of the territories the power
to get mp any government they please. So also va.
il incompetent for Congress to impose upon them
government. All the legislation Of Congress mr.
Lava reference 10 their admission equal W, b
other States Abiding to the ihct that all the Ss
assisting in forming the constitution were slaveh"d
States except one he said thai they having prov
Tor continuance oil Tue Save trace LOT i"euy Je'
it could not be That they intended TO deprive POI
ton OF the people of the use of the territory oota'ne
by the arms and money OF nj the people, or subject
them TO an arbitrary uss of it.
II Congress has omnipotent power over the Terri
tories. there nothing 10 prevent their making M!
man therein slave He could not suppose that such
thing entered the minds Of the trainers OF the
constitution jealous they were OF Legislative pow
err and successfully they resisted it. And they WEI.
not The uen 10 enact. upon this continent the OPP
pres-ive power claimed b. the Parliament OF Eng
land. Adjourned.