Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1856-02-19


seriing the primary constitutional power to
prevent any citizen of the United States, own
tug slaves from removing with them into our
territories, and there receiving legal protection
for his property; and until that time such per.
sons did so remove into all the territories owned
or acquired by the United States, Except the
northwest territory and were there adequately
| protected. This fact alone is a complete refu.
| tttlon OF the claim of early precedents. The
aeii"n OF Congress in reference to the ordi-
/ olnance of 1884, does not coniravene
my position. That ordinance was adopted
on the 18th day OF July, 1887, before the
adoption of the Constitution. 1t purported on
It's lace to be a perpetual compact between the
otate OF Virginia, the people OF that territory,
and the then Government of the United States.
lt was unaterable except by the consent Of all
the parties; when Congress met for the first
TIME under the new government on the 4th
DAY OF March, 1889, it found the Government
established by virtue of this ordinance in ac-
tuai operation; and on the 18th of August,
lio9, 1t passed an act making the officers Of
Governor and Secretary of the territory con.
form to the Federal Constitution 1t did no
thlng more--it made no reference to, it took
no action upon the 9th and last section Of the
ordinance, which prohibited slavery. The
DIVISION OF that territory was provided for in
the ordinance; al each division, the whole of
the ordinance was assigned to each Of its
parts. This is the whole sum and substance
OF the ireesol claim to legislate precedents.
congress uld not assert or exercise the right
to alter compact entered into with the for
mer government THE old confederation but
gave It's assent to the government already es-
tablished and provided for in the compact IF
the original compact was void for want of
power III the old government to make it, as
Mr. Madison supposed, Congress may not have
been bound to accept it, it certainly had no
power to alter 1t. From these facts it is clear,
that this legislation for the northwest territory
does not conflict with the principle assert,
aud does not furnish precedent for hostile
legislation by Congress against slavery in the
| territories That such was neither the princi.
pie nor The policy upon which this act Of Con-
gress in 1889 was based, is further shown by
the subsequent action Of the same Congress
upon the same subject On the I'd of April,
1871, Congress by a formal act accepted the
| session by North Carolina Of her western lands,
lnow the State OF TENNESSEE with this clause
IN the deed OF session-"that no regulations
made, or to be made by Congress, shall tend
to emancipate slaves in the ceded territory
and on the 10th May, 1890, passed territorial
Dill Tor the government of all the territory
claimed by the United States south of the Ohio
river The description of this territory in
cluded all the lands ceded by North Carolina,
and it included great deal more It's boun-
DIARIES were left indefinite because there were
conflicting claims to all the rest of the territory
But his act put the whole country south of the
Ohio, claimed by the Federal Government,
under this proslavery clause of the North
Carolina deed. The whole action of the first
Congress in relation to slavery in the terrific,
| IL, =.
eminent for the northwest territory, based upon
pre-existing anti-slavery ordinance, estab.
lished government for the country ceded by
North Carolina in conformity with the pro.
slavery clause in her deed of cession, and ex-
tended this proslavery clause to all the rest ofthe
territory claimed by the United States. This
legislation vindicates the first Congress- from
all imputation Of having established the prece.
dent claimed by the advocates of Legislative
exclusion. On the 7th of April, 1898, during
the administration Of President John Adams,l
the next territorial act was passed it was the
first act of territorial legislation resting solely
upon primary, original, unfetered constitu-
uonal power over the subject. 1t estab-
| llshed a government over the territory in
cluded within the boundaries of a line drawn
due east from the mouth Of the Yazoo
river to the Chatahoochee river, thence down
that river to the thirty first degree of north ati-
tude, thence west on that line to the Missssip-
| pr, then up that river to the beginning. This
territory was within the boundary of the United
States, as defined by the treaty Of Paris, and
was held not to be within the boundary of any
of the States. The controversy arose out Of
this state of facts. The charter of Georgia
limited her boundary in the south by the Alta.
maha river. In 1868, latter the surrender of
her charter,) her limits were extended on the
south BY the Crown Of Great Britain to the ST.
Mary's river, and thence on the thirty-frst par
allel Of latitude TO the Mississippi river. In
1854, 1t was claimed, that on the recommends.
ton Of the Board of Trade, the boundary was
again altered, and that portion Of trade lying
within the boundaries have described, was an.
nexed to West Florida, and that thus it stood
at the Revolution and the treaty of peace.
Therefore the United States claimed il as com.
mon property, and in 1898 passed the act now
under review for its government. In that act
Congress neither claimed or exercised any
power to prohibit slavery. The question came
directly before 1.-THE ordinance Of 1884, in
terms, excluding the anti.slavery clause, was
applied to this territory: this is precedent d.
rectly in point, and is directly against the ex-
ercise of the power now claimed. In 1902
Georgia coded her western lands, protecting
slavery in her grant, and the Federal Govern.
acquired Louisiana from France by purchase.
There is no special reference TO slavery in the
treaty il was protected only under the general
name Of property. This acquisition was, soon
after the treaty, divided into two territories,
the Orleans and Louisiana territories, over
both of which governments were established.
Slavery was protected by law in the whole ter
ritory when we acquired it. Congress prohib-
tied the foreign and domestic slave.trade in
these territories, but gave the express protec-
ton Of its laws to slaveowners emigrating
thither with their slaves Upon the admission
Of Louisiana into the Union, new government
was established over the rest Of the country,
under the name Of the Missouri Territory.
This act attempted no exclusion, shareholders
emigrated to the country with their slaves and
were protected by their government. In 1919
Florida was acquired by purchase its laws re
cognized and protected slavery at the time Of
the acquisition. The United States extended
the same recooniton and protectinn IN N In