Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-01-24
From the American Democrat.

Mr.. RICHARDSON, Mr.. BANKS AND Mr.. FULLER.
Mr. Richardson claims that Congress has the pow.
er TO exclude slavery from the territories Here is
what he says:
"Mr Richardson 10 reply to the second question
said: In 1903 acquired Louisiana; it was slave
territory In 1920 we divided, by line of SO
deg 80 min that territory; north Of the lire it
was to be free. In 1915 annexed Texas; that
was slave territory; we divided that by extend
ing the line Of SO deg 80 min. through that; north
to be free. In lS4S acquired territory from
Mexico; that was free. voted repeatedly to ex-
tend the same line west to the Pacific ocean. /
voted for that line with a few Representatives from
the Nortn and the whole body OF Southern repre-
sentatives. When gave those votes | did not
believe then, nor do believe now, that | violated
the Constitution OF the United States IfyOu have
power under the Constitution to exclude slavery
from half territory, | think you have the power
to exclude from all, though such exercise would
be unjust and wrong. | have never therefore,
voted to exercise that power, except upon the
principle of compromise. uniformly voted against
placing the Wilmot prOvso in any territorial bill
voted against it because believed it to be unjust
to the people of portion Of this Union"
That will do for Mr. Richardson He believes
in the constitutionaty the Wlmot proyiso, and
yet the Southern Democracy support, him as they
did Van Bnren, and do Pierce, and will any body
who can keep the spos in their pockets. A pre-
cious set of patriots they are, to be sure!
The position of Mr. Banks, the Black Republi-
can candidate for Speaker, is Identical with that of
Mr Richardson This is what he says,
ale believed in the eonstitutionality Of that act
which is known as the Wlmot proyisO. He be.
ieved it to be within the power of Congress to
prohibit the Institution OF slavery in a Territory
belonging to the United States Whether he
", uld advocate the passage of such act in ref
erence to a Territory where it clearly unneces-
sary, because by the local existing laws it had
been already prohibited, would depend upon cir
cumstances"
Now hear what Mr.. Fuller says on the same sub
ject
:As to the second interrogatory relating to the
constutionality of the WilmOt proviso, he had
never, and did not now, advocate the constitution
atty OF the Wilmot prOviso, he had never.
mtted himself to the position that if the terrific
rial bills were silent the subject Of slavery,
leaving il TO the operation of the Mexican laws, he
would vote for a bill embodyng the WiImot pro-
vso
las to the third interrogatary he had never
taken position on the subject but willing TO
pronounce upon it now. Slavery existed before
existed independent of the Constitution. When
the people Of the confederated States met by
their representatives, in convention TO form that
Constitution, slavery exstedin all but one Of the
States of the Confederaev. The people through
their representatives, having an existing and &C.
knowledged right to hold slaves, conceded this
the right to prohibit irnportation-after the year
| 1903. They made no concession so Tar regarded
the existence OF domestic slavery. They claimed
Z III nd II Tod ~
slaves in case of escape. They claimed the right
of representation, and it was granted He held
that Congress had no right to legislate upon the
subject Of slavery, and that the Territories are
the common property of all the States. The
people Of all the States therefore, rad right to
! enter upon aud occupy that territory and were
projected by the flag OF the country, He thought
that Congress had 20 right TO legislate it in or
exclude it from Territory, aud in bis Judgment the
Territorial Legislature, had no right TO egislate
upon that subject, except far 20 protect the
citizens of the Territory in ;he enjoyment Of their
property. He believed he bad answered all the
questions, and had nothing more to say"
Yet there are Southern Locofocos who have the
mpudence to hold up Richardson as orthodox, and
Fuller as unsound upon this subject
Our readers win doubtless recollect the violence
with which the Philadelphia platform was assailed
by these same incoruptible gentlemen, because it
pretermitted the expression Of an opinion with re-
gardto this power Of Congress They said il was an
A ol'tion trap. II it was not, Why did not the
Convention say at once that Congress bad now pow.
er to legslste on the subject OF slavery in the
Territories? Here is their own man for Speaker
not preterniiting the expression Of his opinion
on the subject bat boiling saying Congress has the
power. Many sound Wings, not at al tainted with
Aboonism, were denounced by these Southern
puriss, fos expressing the very opinion which ihes
candidates expresses. Yet they bold on to him.
1t is not farce to hear these men pra,ing about
principle?