The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1857-11-19
Correspondence of the N Y. Tribune
pebote on slavery in the Kansas
constitutional Convention.


The report on slavery was called up Mr.. Chnes \
of Johnson moved an additional section 10 tne 70 T
nort. making it obligatory on the first Legislature
to mass laws making the presence OF free negroes :
In The Sta,e AN act of felony punishable oy I'm
nrsonmen in the peuitcntiary ana also, II slaves
Shall be free and shall persist in remaining III tne
State that their conduct shall be FELONY Pun'sn-
able by the peni''hiinry; ,. .,,o ,,oror
IN ;notion of Mr. Boiling, to change the power
,,;,o, In the LEGISLATURE TO pass law preventing
Slaves beiup brought here to sell, Mr. Rahdolpn
,,o, mn and said the object of the provision was 10
nreveut Niger traders from bringing nere Vl,e
nybola scTipiags of the southern conederacy' II
was not that they had any CONSCIENTIOUS scruP'es
shoni buylnr or selling niggers but it was to pre-
vent every trader from bringing here oil lhe oiu,
bi,j halt anl lame nggers, 50 that they wonlu
get all the mean niggcrs. 1t would be SO IL tne
african slave trade was opened. The country
woull be filled with mean nlggers' lney "ouI
have 90 clucate and cnlighten them Tor tue use Vi
the North. for whenever they got the hlggels
properly educated they went on on ihV ha u''EO'
rr,opnd railroad That's the way 1t wouiu DE-
NJ Rolinc said the object of his amendment
,,s ,,a,clv 10 reduce it TO the position IN whch
tbe matter was left by the Dred Scott decSl m
They had decided that negroes were properly Juo'
the same rs u horse or any other properly P'oP
crtv the owners should have perfect ana uli1
trsmmeled right to take it where they p,e"seu uuu
Eall
il propery. The speaker alluded ironlcAlly W 'he
isothermal line" 49,, o,,,d
Mr. Jenkins spoke He too, took the ground
iha, the decision of the Dred Scott case se,teu lne
slavery question. Men could take their slayeS sS
crv,yEcrt,--cord oEu>Ls-Ur rne Court were Black
-sTarrUnal Democrats, and THEREFORE decided as
they did.
Jenkins spoke dsparngingly of Squatter Sover-
eighty He had always thought it a humbug
Mr. Moore, Chairman Of the Committee did not
object to the amendment of Bowling on the prin-
cipIe that it was surplusage for the very reasons
given by the speaker, The Dred Scott decision had
settled it irrevocably, aud it were better not to
egislate on such subject.
Here Mr.. Bowling rose and said
q would ask the gentleman from Georgia.
beg his pardon, from Leavenwor;h-if there is such
provision by law in Georgia p
Mr.. Moore said there was. There were Just !
such provisions in Georgia, and it was to prevent
imposition on negro owners The speaker here
went off on an eloquent burst about State Rights y
A State had the rightto exclude rotten beef wood
en- nutmegs or other nuisance, to establish Sa-
very as they pleased. Having established State |
rights thus, the Speaker came back to the Dfed e
Scott decision. That decision was a mandate I
Decree final decision, that had gone forth to the v
country, and irrevOcable, The Convention had p
no power to interfere with the terms of that decis- c
ion. 1t had gone forth, and no State authority u
can touch it. u
Mr.. Little got up. He was in favor of the
amendment The law of Georgia was merely
means by which the State could speculate upon the
poor. The rich had all the negro-tradng. They
could sell out their negroes at all advance of 80
per cent, and then 60 out to another State buy in
lot Of negroes, bring them back, keep them B
month or two and then sell them He knew how
it was. He had been in Georgia when the law =
was passed. He had five negroes that he could
not sell before for l 900 and after it he had sold
them Tor 81 800 apiece. That was how it worked. j
The speaker thoughN the bred Scott decision had 4
put matters on their true ground. Before that =
decision slaves had been regarded as property, it
was true, but it was sort OF property only They
were by general opinion and State laws allowed to
have sort of rights and that decision had taken
The broad ground that slaves wers property--nsth-
er less or more This was the true ground for the ~
south. This was the right position they had got y
It last, AMI no Southern man should be found call
ng 1t in question. 1t was enough for the Re- ~
JubIcans to d. that. He was for the amend VI
nent. "
Mr. Danforlh rose to sustain the report No man be
ould aI in question the fact that he was one of wa
he stro lJes PgO-S.avery men in the Convention,
l. d'i not Ike to ditr with his friend from Doug
as NJ Bowling. II the latter would modify his
nth ntn N 81 ne shape 50 not to mar the re-
ort. he would Ike to sustain it. This report had
cen ira ned from the re 5ulatOns of Georgia, the
lOol u'lTd VI lhe oOuNltrll OtuLtS
Nc Bowling again spoke, and urged the ques- =
on again On the groud that his amendment twas was Ri
l the best accordance with the Dred Scott decs-
)h He said this was the question which divided
he parties in the country really. This the 10
rue issue.
Mr.. JcnRin, again rose and began to catechIse
ir Moore OIL State Rights Mr. Jenkins wanted II
preamble put either to this clause or to the Con- L
ltutlon Itself recognizing in explicit terms the AM
)red Scott decision He blieved it was expected II
us He thought tue Dred Scott decision was Ii
lG true Southern ground Even in that report he
wv something that seemed to initiate iu some
use, against the complete properly-iiea of the {
ave. 1t was the provisions that the slaves must wa
treated in a CERTAIN manner anl looking indirect. wo
to some extent to some kind of an idea of their Par
ghts. He did not Wish to impugn the motives of sho
e gentlemen on the Committee, for he knew they |
ere the most ultra Pro-Savery men in this Con- GiT
nton, and they had modelled theI report from me
e most ultra Slave States in the Contederacy
1t even here it appeared that it was in some sense II
.hnd. the Dred Scott decision. 1t was for this -,
ason that he wanted to incorporate the bred Bo,
ott decision into the constitution as the true DO DO
lion of Southern men
Mr.. Wells spoke in favor of the report, but II
rev no new light on the subject. =,
Mr.. Stewart OF Douglas made speech chiefly I
yndicdtion of his own position. He was as true
Pro Slavery interests as any man He was born II
SO To-, l., q - st.. -, JH,t. best
with the Democracy for the sake Of beating u
wn the Republicans. But he did not take as
trome views as some of those who had spoken. ~
did not take the position, under the Dred Scott ~
csOn, that State had not the right to make ny ~
;al regulations for the regulation OF the Slavery -
esion to suit themselves The State had such
,hs. Besides he favored the report just as it IN
IS. He felt that it of preserving the pin,
immunity from imposition. 1t was also means j
preserving the community against negro ira
rs class who engaged in such traffic until IN
cir consccnces were scared us with hot iron i
This clause was some security to humanity, He the
. as true to Southern rights as any man but imp
n,nd In have nrnnar soE,Tnar1, be :
Mr. Henderson was plesled with the report as -