Muscatine weekly journal. [volume] (Muscatine, Iowa) 185?-1890, 1857-10-03
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1851.
Slavery i'm sse ,TryFit0-ice.


stantiato the assertion Of Mr.. Baahnnai
''that slavery existed at that time 4 81 /
and still exists in Kansas under the conStitu
ton Of the L. So upon the fact that til
territory comprising Kansas was, in I55333
granted to the Cherokee Indians, slave
holding people. We shall not follow hin
through his long historical citations as nei-
thcr our time Or space Will admit oft. Suf-
flee it to say that the 9. ant to these Indians
as in all other like instances was understood
to be special and to have certain limitati rs
fhcpresampton that slavery could have been
legally instituted in Kansas under this gran
without it being carried there by the G Cher
okces themselves is unwarrHntable. And
yet this is unqucstionably tho sense in which
President Buchanan makes the declaration
lie does not say that slavery exists in Kan :
sas by virtue of the Cherokee grant Of
1888. lie makes the declaration in sucit
Il manner as to apply to a"y Territory
| OF the United States. Such We believe to
have been his real meaning. We do not
shink he will dare to come out before the
pub ic with such Il special plcaiing or apol-
ogy as our correspondent puts forth for him
1t would d!splease the Southern Democracy
and cause the disruption of the grylt ''Na-
tional party His Southern al les VIII re-
ceivc the declaration in its broadest, Ltitu-
dinaran sense. 1t is left for the Dc.nocra-
| cy of the North to be told that the President
only adhcrinG to the requirements Of the
Cherokee grant of 1888.
What better evidence need We give that
we have truly appreh2ndod the Presidents
meaning and that our correspondent is mis-
takn than the words which Immediately
follow the declaration alluded t, in his let
ter to the Connecticut clcrgymcn? :'Th:s
point" he says, 'has at iasC been decided
by the highest tribunal known 20 oGr laws
The Supreme Courts Drcd Scot decision
How it could ever have been SERIOUSLY
doubted is a mystery" Here the doctriue
is distinctly avowod. that slavery is roco3niz
ed ny the constitution in the Territori $
But this, as most of our readers know, is q
pcrvcrsion of the meaning Of the constitutions
In the language OF a cOtemrorary, "a slave
is not property beyond ihs law which makes
him SO. This is the doctrine of civilized
Europe, and it is The doctrine Of ali Alneri-
can Courts, except the opinions Of the
Judges referred to. If the Un5 tuition Of
the Union protects slaves, and au, u,horizcs
masters to hold them as sucn, where there
is no law establishing slavery, the constitu
ton being the paramount law it must cper-
ate in the free Stal, j, l,es well as in the free
Territories. If it protects slavery beyond
the limits Of slavery, it must be without
limitation. but there is no such power in
the constitution, except in regard to The re-
turn of fugitivcs from labor; nor has sucn a
power ever been asserted in the opinions Of
any Court.
"rhc power Of Congress to e.cc'"do slave
~ from the Territories was exercised by
passing the ordinance Of 1877, BY many Of
those members who formed the constitution
and understood its meaning. Slavery vas
prohibited from the North Western territo-
~, with "A few or no dissenting votes, and
this ordinance was adopted under the consti-
tuition. For sixty years no judge or states
man doubted this power. 1t was universal
ly held as constitutional act, by the South
us we'll as by the North. There is not a
State Court in the Sonth which did not al
nit the force of this law. LHcct was given
to it By every Southern State, in declaring
that slaves taken into n territory aDd. kept
there were made frec''
|. MUscATISE, Sept. 25d, 81
EDITOR OF JouRNaL: In your daily issue
of the 18th inst; in commenting upon the
Presidents reply to a memorial on Kansas
affairs, by Professor Sillimaa and others,
you use the following languages:
The statement here made by President
Buchanan, that the Nebraska bill did not
legSlate slavery into Kansas, is the same
that has been uttered d thousand times by
the liireliug press and tools Of the slaveholei-
crs. But, we ask, how then did slavery get
there? 1t was prohibited by the Compro-
mise Of 1929, and could not have gone there
without the repeal of that Compromise by
the Nebraska bill. The r: markable decla-
ration Of Mr.. Buchanan that ''siavery exists
under the Constitution Of he United State"
deserves inquiry and serious considerations.
Is it true? If so, he has been the first Pres
ldent to discover and enunciate the fact =
Not a syllable Of the kind can be found in
AL the writings Of the Presidents, from the
time Of Washington down to Pierce.
Absence from the city has prevented an
earlier notice of the matter. ''The rcmalka-
bic declaration, &c. deserves inquiry ans,
seGions considerations" That inquiry and
consideration propose in this communica.
ton. he Territorial pol4cy iraugurated in
1880, pract, cnlly applied in 1854, and en-
dorsed and approved by the people in the
the election OF James Buchanan to the Pres
| idency, is for prominence and Importance
without a parallel in the history Of our
government. Submitted to an ordeal, in its
application by the passage Of the Kansas
Nebraska bill thatno other measures Of gov
ernment policy was ever subject to, it stands
prominently a monument Of the wisdom OF
its authors, and Il beacon light for all future
territorial legislation. There are those
however forming a respectable portion of
the people northl who, refusing to acknowl-
edge its adaptation to our circumstances,
charge upon its friends great wrong and out
rage and violation of national faith, by the
abrogation Of what is called the Missouri
|