Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-09-27


his speech at Cincinnati on the 9th inst, hav'
ing stated that "the Constitution Of the United
States has declared that that instrument and
the law passed in pursuance Of It are the su-
preme law of the land, and Judge Ranney hav-
ing in the discussion in this city on the 18th
inst. also used this phrase as well as many OF
the arguments in that speech of Mr.. Douglas,
take the liberty Of addressing both of you
jointly.
As this quotation stands in connection, in
both speeches, with remarks on the fugitive slave
acts aGd the "Iescuo trials" in Ohio the
current season, shall consider briefly
the said quotation along with the
Ordinance of 1857 in their application to the
northwestern States The Constitution Art
6. declares, This Constitution and the laws of
the United States which shall be made in pur-
suance thereof; and all treaties made or which
shall be made, under the authority of the Uni
ted States, shall be the supreme law Of the
land"
The Declaration of Independence was the
enunciation of great principles as a whole peo-
pie laid its hand upon the sword for their vindi.
cation. The Ordinance of 1877, eleven year s
later, was, as to the northwest territory, its
counterpart It was the last will and testament
of the Old Confederation and may be said to
have terminated its career. These two instru.
meuts marked two epochs; one opening con-
Aict which the historic pen never tires in des-
cribing; the other, the proclamation, after the
people had come from victory, of the great land
marks Of civil government for the millions who
should after inhabit the then distant aud uninhab
tied territory, now become beautiful constol-
lation of States among the stars of the Union
recite from the Ordinance, "And for extend
ing the fundamental principles Of civil and re-
ligious liberty which form the basis whereon
these republics their laws and constitutions are
erected; to fix and establish those principles as
the basis of all laws, constitutions and govern
ments which forsrer hereafter shall be formed
in the said territory, to provide also for the es-
tablishment of States aud permanent govern.
ment therein" at is hereby ordained aud de-
clared by the authority aforesaid, That the fol.
lowing articles shall be considered as articles of
Compact between the original States and the peo-
! pie and States in the said territory, and forever
| remaiu unalterabe, unless by common consent"
| The sixth and last article reads as follows :
"There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary
seryitude in the said territory, otherwise than
| in the punishment of crimes, whereo! the party
/ shall have been duly convicted; provided al
ways, that any person escaping into the same,
from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed
in any one of the original States, such fugitive
l., f,,f ,,l Eb
person claiming his or her labor or service as
aforesaid"
The status of slavery, resident or fugitive,
could not exist The prohibition covers the
whole ground. An exception is made if the
| person be fugitive from one Of the original
/ States If the decision of Lord Mansfield in
| the Somerset case was so conclusive where
there was no statute against slavery, how i'm
pregnable against its introduction where the
prohibition by sol,Inu decree had been a sub.
ject carefully considered for years. AS to the
binding perPetuiiy OF the Ordinance, the in
srument itself is in terms that give 1t inherent
vitality and everlasting obligation. Consti-
tuition, if formed could not infringe its provis
ions from the most perfect freedom of opera.
tion Congress under the Constitution recog-
nized the enduring validity Of the Ordinance
and among the earliest acts Of its first session
was one by which the Ordinance "may contiu.
ue to have full force,' and thus it was re-afiir-
med by vet further augmented and solemn
sanctions The act was duly approved by
President Washington, Aug z, 1889 The Or
dinauce wus thus taken bodily into the code oi
the new dispensatiOn.
Congress has never repealed or amended the
Ordinance. They never could do either. When
Ohio came into the Union in 1902, it was under
the provisions of an act Of Congress that the
To- L. IL,
republican, and NOT REPUGNANT to the Ordi
nance of 1887 between the original States and
the people and States of the territory" The
people Of the State on coming into the Union
! accepted the Ordinance as a whole, and they
too realiimed the incessant obligation of all its
provisions. In the preamble to the Constitution
we find the following: I'VE the people of the
eastern division of the territory of the u. $.
northwest OF the river Ohio, having the right
of admission into the general government as a
member Of the Union consistent with the Con
sttution of the United States, the Ordnance d
Congress Of 1897" DC. The inteTdict agsinst
slavery was transferred to the State Constitution
in the very words of the Ordinance, and an
additional provision was inserted declaring that
"no alteration of the Constitution shall EVER
take place, SO as to introduce slv very OF invol
untary servitude into this State" The 9th ar
ticle Of compact in the Ordinance, the prohinl
tun of slavery, was successively transferred t
the Constitutions of all the northwestern State
down to that of Wisconsin erected in lS46.-
The Supreme Court of Ohio in 1881 in HOgG
VS. ZaaeSpilie Canal and Mana taetuTing Com
pany affirmed by its decision in this case The
validity of the Ordinance which dedicated for.
ever free, 'the navgable waters leading into the
Mississippi and st. Lawrence and the carrying
places between the same" That decision
turned upon this provision of the Ordinance -
! again in the case of SpOOner VS., Nc COaReH tn
Supreme Court of Ohio in 1886 re. affirmed th
same opinion based upon the unabrogate
article Of the Ordinance. These articles o
compact in the Ordinance, say the Suprem
Court, are of "higher obligation than the Stat
, Constitution, for the Constitution may be alter
= ed by the people of the State, whilo these can
J., not be altered without the assent" of the peopl
r of all the Ordinance States on the one hand an
the people Of the original States on the othe
the two parties 10 the compact That the re
capture of fugtives in the 9th article G
compact in the Ordinance was restricted to tn
original States and never TO extend TO ne'
States is also evident from the terms Of Oh
article relative to the navigable waters leadin
S into the ST. Lawrence and the Mississippi f
n they were to be "forever free as well 10 the il
4 habtants of the said territory as to the citizen
Of the U. AID those Of aay other States M,
, may be admitted into The eoajederaey."
> The prohibition OF slavery in tue Ordinanc
n is not superseded or abrogaied by the erecho
n of States in the territory. The operation of I'll
Ordinance in this respect through the Const
Is tuition of Illinois was seen by decision of tn
n Supreme Court of that State in lS45. TIL
II French Mississippi Company in 1870 bougl
500 slaves at st. Domingo and took them U
the river to Illinois TO work the mines. Shaver
: was now established by statute and protecte