New-York daily tribune., 1858-07-23

an, being in noss Of them regarded - Desirable "
must be supposed, therefore, that the ins'n"o' v"
TO introduce them either - slaves or indentured 'P
pr. .Ltces But their introduction In either oi taoSe
character. was not only prohibited bot msdo
bsbly crimir al act by the laws against the 'n'o-
trade, ar on these grounds he directed the c'eA'
atte TO be refused.
To get rid # the difficulty suggested BY the oe'.
re.ary a. standing IN the way of the lntroduca0n
African enisrants into tie United S'ANA MI La
mar made another application for clears'ce 'o'
tb. coa,t o!AfeA 'to take On board Atricsn ap-
" prentic.s AID return With them TO poH IL
CUBA" In this spplcsticn he relied upon 'o'
difference Ct phrneol gy between the act oi i's''
prohibiting American vessels to engage In 'ne
tr.np ration of sl.ves to other countries, and the
at tf 1867, prohibiting the importation Of Atncan'
into the United States. This latter does In
terms prohibit tie introduction not only Of Ahcsa
slaves but Of African apprentices, while the
oct Of 1894 speaks only of slaves. Bot to this spph
cation Mr.. Secretary Cobb replied th,t between
the slave trade coLfessedy such, and the transport
Of slaves under the name and form Of spPren'iced
Afiicanr. the Goyernu ent did lot recognize any
distir ction.
Mr. Lamar in bis new letter, seeks to Tx on
Nr. Secretary Cobo q charge Of disingenuousnsss
in pretending to cast about as be did to discover
what might be the object Of the application, when
all the time be knew very well, from Mr.. Lamar'
private letter that the object aimed st was to tesr
by an actual importation of Africans the consstu'
tior Atty Of the prohibitive law To that Law Dir.
Lam.r takes these objections: First, it was passed
IN 1907. in violation of the clause Of the Constitu-
ton prohibiting Congress from prohibiting that
trsfic prior to 1eOS. Second, the Constitution
contains no specific grant whatsver Of any power
to ksislate on the subject. The declaration that
tbe importation of slaves should not be prohibited
before 1SO5 was the delegation Of no power to Pis
,uch prohibition. II implies the belief that Con-
gpess would have the power, but is not grant OF
that power, which falls, in fact, within the sub'e-
queIt amer dment, by which all powers not delegated
to Congress are expressly reserved to the States.
Third, it is not embraced In the power to regulate
commerce, because in fact the prohibition WAS
made without ally regard to commercial conHdera-
tons, but grew out Of considerations wholly for
eign to that subject.
Having fully made up his mind on these points,
Mr. Lamar is not to be prevented, by the refusal Of
Mr.. Secretary Cobb to become party to the
question, from bringing the question before the
Supreme Court; ard certainly, in view of the
Dred Scott case, Mr. Lamar has abundant
reason to expect that the Court will go with him.
Under ordinary circumstances be would not violate
the laws. He likes to sustain them when he can.
But this law against the slave trade not adopted
by the "intelIgence," at all events not BY the
genius" of the South. 1t is enforced by the
sentiment of another and hostile section of the
country 1t is badge Of servitude, brand OF
reprobation, and Mr. Lamar not only will not sus-
tain it. but as he frankly told the Secretary In the
beginning, he means to violate it. However, even
Mr.. Lamar does not seem to be quite
up to the mark Of running the risk
of being hanged. He does not propose to
import African slaves into the United States. But
he has fully made up his mind "to reopen the trade
{" in slaves to foreign COUNTRIES and he adds
"your cruisers may catch me if they can" So far
as that matter is concerned, We do not imagine that
Mr.. Lamar is in any great danger; bat unless he
allows himself to be caught how is the question to be
raised Of the consttutionality Of the laws prohibit
ing the tave-tradel
On the whole we do not perceive that Mr.
Lamar takes much by this correspondence He
could not reasonably expect to shift off upon the
shoulders Of Mr.. Cobb the risk and responsibility
of treating the laws against the slaye-trsde IS q
Dullity; nor with Mr.. Lamars private letter be-
fore him, was it possible for Mr. Cobb to have
granted the clearance asked for without thereby
making himself party to Mr.. Lamars project for
the revival of the slave-trade.
According TO the London journals, Indian stock
and railway securities have of late been dis.in-