The weekly Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1861, 1858-09-09
Judge RartIcy.


forts to decry the reputation and consistency
Of our distinguished candidate for the Su-
preme Court. They might as well try to
bite file in two. The position he has fill
ed so long aud so well, aud the estimation
in which be is universally held, unite to de-
fy the assaults of slander and envy. Below
we copy On article from the Mansfield Shield
and Banner, refuting an attempt to garble
the record:
BASE MIsREPREsENrATIoN OF JUDGE
BARTLEY. Mansfield Herald of last
week contains an article headed Judge Bart
ley In ls47,' attempting to produce the i'm
preston, by pretended extracts from pro.
ductions Of Judge B. in lS47 In 1854, and
in 1857 that his opinions on the negro ques.
ton had been inconsistent. The article al
luded to consists of an extract from letter
of Judge BIS relative TO the Wilmot Provi.
so, known some years ago as private let
ter Brinkerhoffed, also a part OF q sentence
extracted from Judge BIS speech on the
Nebraska Bill, and garbled and prevented
extract from his opinion in the Poindexter
case.
Now, the letter had relation to the Will
mot Proviso as an amendment 10 the "Three
Million Bill" proposed appropriation to
purchase Southern territory in treaty of
peace with Mexico and was written before
the Wilmot Proviso wns proposed as q pro-
vision in law of Congress organizing a
territorial government. In the appropria-
ton bill, the proviso was simply an abstract
a. ~ tha -,
ton, and which could have been incorporat.
ed in the treaty of purchase. A declaration
against slavery, in a treaty for the acquisi.
tion Of territory, is one thing; and prohi.
bition in law Of Congress organizing a ter
ritory another and different thing. One is
a compact, and the other a local municipal
iap and the two cannot be claimed to be
done under the same grant Of power in the
constitution. Judge b., in his letter in re-.
ference to the appropriation to purchase ter.
ritory in treaty of peace, and before the
time }ad arrived for enactiug law By Con.
gresS to organize territorial government,
said: "If territory is TO purchaShed, now,
no,O is the time, and the only e0ectual time to
say slavery or not Slavery" The effect of
the latter, fairly constructed, is that ii oas
al the time Of The acquisition Of the ter, ttory,
and not at the time of the passage of a law
to organize q territorial government, that
slavery could be prohibited. The hasty ex-
preston, therefore, in this Brinkerhoffed let.
ter, was not inconsistent with Judge B IS
position in his Nebraska speech as to non.
Intervention by Congress in law for the or
ganzation Of territorial government, as he
most fully and satisfactorily explained at
the time in his remarks.
The extract from Judge BIS opinion in
the Poindexter case, 6. o. St. Rep. 724, is
garbled, and parts left out, with a view of
producing the false impression, that B. was
in 1857, pro.slavery man. This is gross
and base perversion of the truth, as is we'll
known to the person who prepared this
garbed extract for publication. Any one
who will take the pains to read Judge B.'s
opinion in the Poindexter case, will see the
! black design in the garbled extract. AS a
ground for refusing to recognize legal rights
arising under the laws of Kentucky, in the
intercourse between the two States, the po.
sition was taken in the opinion of the maio-
rity Of the Court, that slavery; as it existed
in Kentucky, was contrary to law both ma.
tioDal and divine. In noticing this position
Judge B. stated, that it was unnecessary to
consider the question, whether negro slave
ry was contrary to the divine law, as that
Court did not sit there to administer the di.
vine law. And after stating the question
with the references sufficient to show the ex
istence and nature of the question, he added:
"Ihese are questions for the t1eologian and
the moraltSt, and upon ,Ohich, I do not deem
1t proper 10 cypress any opinion sohatsver
here. 1t is sufficient to know, that in the iu-
dical determination of question, there is
no higher law to us, than the Constitution
which we have sworn to support Now,
this fal!acious extract, published in the He.
raid, garbles the opinion, leaving out the re.
ferenees showing the existence and naturc
oil the question, and stops short off the two
sentences above quoted, in which Judge B.
says, in express words, that he expresses no
opinion on The question whatever, adding :
"We are not here to determine questions OF
divinity or of casuistry. In determining
how far we may disregard the comfy of na-
tlons, and refuse to recognize or enforce
rights arising out of legal relation in ano.
ther State, we must look to the legal stand.
ard of morality, instead of the conflicting
theories OF theoIoglans and moralists," &c.
This garbled extract comes from person
who has known we'll ever since he first came
into Ohio, and helped himself by kind and
friendly aid from Judge B., that the impress
sion, which the gorbled extract was design
ed to produce, to wit: that Judge B.. was O
pro slavery man, was Jalse Upon the theo.
logical question, Judge expressed no OPT.
nion but whatever may be his opinion on
that question, certain it is, as is we'll known
to the person who prepared this extract for
the newspaper, he is and has ever been op.
posed 10 negro slavery on other grounds.
Now, if garbing a mans written opinions
in order to produce a false impression, be
fair and proper conduct among honorable
men, no fault can be found with either the
honor or the morality of Mexican Guerrillas
A Canal through the Rocky