Kanawha Valley star. [volume] (Charleston, Va. [W. Va.]) 1856-1861, 1859-07-05
From the W ashinston Ssathern cilizeu.i
I'll 5N0n.IuterYenii0n. i.s sg4

Deliberately and with eyes wide open,
4 large portion Of the Southern Democra-
ICY is'now preparing lii cannot be denied
10 negotiate another Gonspyonstse !; the
the most fatal and pernicious Of all their
compromises and % adnitthat the great
principle announced III the sCincinnati
platform - Il non interference by Congress
with slagery 10 State or Territory, OF In
the District Of t'olumbia' means, Meth
er more nor less than total abandonment
Eof ah right torprotection Of that species of
property wherever Congress is the Su-I
pielne power--that is specifically in Ter
litories and in the District of Columbia.
H The compromise isarriyel 1T, very ap-
propriately, by an equiyoeation-by ISL.
summing 1.-THE one side and granting on
the other. that non -interierence with The
Institution means non protection Of the
property. Butthe institution is one thing
and the property is another Congress
has no power % create by Legislation Tie
business III cotton planting III any Terri
tory but if farmer plants cotton there,
and if .thefunction Of q legislature Be 10
protect property which nobody denies
then ii IL the plain duty OF Congress
Of file Legislature called iato exis,eneeaby
it, 10 protect the farmers property in HE
cotton be raises. Congress has no pow
egto legislate literature into i Territory,
|orlegislate il out, but man who brings
bookBinto 4 Territory ought. we suppose,
y be protected4in the enjoyment pf 1his
books. iEsk
1ffCongress, orthe legislature. its ageilt,
refuses 10 protect property ii books, Why
thFn Congress makes Intervention agaifsf
literature. Non-interfereAce. with ditera-
;nre. nsTefritosies requires that the leg
islature, or Congress. in its default, shall
protect q mans property in his books. -
just SO non interference with slavery. re-
quires the Legislature, or Congress ID its
defanlt.,to Prosecta man i property ID bis
slaves. f..FJ
h No difference can be SO much as coiis
WINGED between the two cases, exceptItbis
ditference--that books and cotton are
properly. but slaresFare not property II
Are SoulhernFmeh prepared toadmit III?
And snpposesths doctrine admitted THAT
1.-The Cincinnati t.4hop interference with
s.aYerysin States rand Territories. oil The
DistritT of Columbia, Z meaLs3the. denial
of protection to this speciesfof property,
Why then III follows that Congress is
bound % Withdraw all protection which
now exists for slave property. here in
Washington. District Of Columbia -
Heretofore ii has been believed that the
power and duty ofsonr Legislature fthat
IS Congress was not to force slavery
hpon Us, nor exclude il from US, but sim
fpIs 10 protect US ID the enjoyment Of our
properly Of what kind. soeYer. For the
futufeA-if this Gonstrous4 doctrine belsub-
sdriAed 10 by the Democratic party---lhe
Black Republicans may come in and say
.-as they Will-now abrogatet al laws Of
/ The District which enablst A STAKEHOLDER
ID use, to3control aoi re capture his slave:
non-in,eryention is the word. We See
nothing further that can prssept olr6Nor-
kthern brethren from pushing the doctrine
tothis Legitimate logical result.
The whole Of the arguments addressed
tto the South in support Of Mr.. Douglas
ahdlis doctrine, rest this single equiv
ocation-- that the establishment or eaelu-
| sion III the institution, means protection
or pon- protection Of iha property; and
on lhisfuture my stiieation, that +.
H T Congressional legislation in protection of
slavery In the Territories, rresistibly carries
with i the power to iegisiate for ifs exclu-
sion.' Il B. Isl
E- Now therelare laws III the District oil
Columbia. Isnacted by Congress from the
State Of ENTHUSIASTICALLY slaye+hoid-
ers are protected in the possession 81 their
slaves, and enabled toEcontrvl them 81
does this carry with it the power to rob
every man Of his slaves And if not,
why not {? @ sss
Because il is.the duty ana function 81
q Legislature to protect property aad noi
ito rob-.
In short there is no shadow ola pre-
text for admitting that slave property
should not b. projected in Territories
for In, this Disttict--exeept that one iney.
filable inexorable, irreyocable admission
that slave holders are thieves It's sim.
Iply the South pleading guilty guilty
the counts. Whatever our North
Tern brethren have heretofore urged agains
ISoathern men--that they are tyrants. phi
Ira,es, fraudulent dealers Jill other meai
bones and sineWs--dH is summed up,
asd fully admitted in this one plea--tha
IIheir property ought not 10 be protectet
lin their own Territories like the properly
lof other men.
iii So. we are extremely tired Of tht
Subject and begin TO apptehend that al
tour labor is sin vain. Why should we,
IRho do not own a negro ii the world dis
tquiet our souls about The status and right.
lof slave property. If those whomfit mos
NEARLY concerns are willing to compro
mise il away ? If the South be Iconlen
Ito see i.s ancient and admirable institution
branded with such i stigma before all .lit
world what IS it to the SouTHERE Cir
ZEN? Ifthe South, for the sake Of III,
harmony Of ths party and the Eighty Mil
Hons, chooses to fold her hands and lay
down to sleep. what have we to dc stirring
her up with q long pole.
AS the great Presidential campaigt
"Opens, we End many Southern journals
lone after another, either falling silent 81
this subject altogether, Of else deliberatel,.
lembfacing thedelusion.
\ The Mobile Mercury and Mobil,
a RHfyister.,, after arguing the matter