The eastern clarion. [volume] (Paulding, Miss.) 1837-1863, 1859-08-10

1854 on the bill for the organization OF
Kansas and Nebraska, the original draft
was modified so as to declare that the
Constitution should have the same force
and effect in those territories as elsewhere
in the United States, and the obstruction
to the enjoyment in that territory of equal
rights by the citizens of the Southern
States, known "a the Missouri comprO-
mise, was swept from the statute book,
which was the legitimate consequence of
the refusal to extend that line to the Pa
cific through the territories acquired from
Mexico. What were our Constitutional
rights in the territories remained an open
question, being designedly left for judicial
decision.
Thanks to the care of our fathers for the
rights Of minorities, an umpire was proyi-
ded for such controversies, which removed
from the influence of popular excitement
and the power of political parties, was left
free to discriminate between truth and
error, and without fear or favor, to do JUS
tice. That umpire has decided the issue
in our favor, and though placemen may
evade, and fanatics rail, the Judgment
stands the rule Of right, and claims the re
spect and obedience of every citizen of
the United States
But now, when the matter in contro-
versy which has so long impeded and per-
verted the action of Congress, has been
finally decided according to the provisions
of our fundamental law, there are those
who seek to revive the controversy by in
direction and deny the obligation of the
general government to give efficacy to
Constitutional rights which have been es-
tablished beyond the limits of legitimate
denial. What could be meaner than the
.1,-@ 4 Il I
tion-thOugh you have gained the suit in
the issue we joined and in the manner
agreed upon, yet we cannot consent that
you should have whatever remedies are
needful to secure the future enjoyment of
the right you have established!
The government which withholds all
practicable and rightful protection to its
citizens forfeits its claim to allegiance and
support. To establish justice, ensure do
mestic tranquility and provide for the COM
mon defence, were the great purposes for
which our Union was formed 1t was in
the discharge of these great duties, which
| he who swears to defend the Constitution
/ may find declared in its preamble, that
we waged the war of 1872. To protect our
merchantmen from detention and search
| upon the high seas, and to defend our citi-
1 zens native and naturalized from impress
ment we inscribed on our banner free
trade and sailors rights" and all unpre-
| pared as we were, threw the wager of bat
tie to the mistress of the seas.
In your resolutions, you have we'll de-
MED that we are estopped from demanding
| protection by acquiescence in the doctrine
of non-intervention with the institution
| Of slavery in the States, Territories, or Dis
| trict of Columbia. Twill not undertake to
define the new doctrine of "non-interven-
| tion," shadowy and variable, it may be
classed, with what a preacher termed the
third division of his subject that of which
/ he knew nothing and which his hearers
/ could not possibly understand. Itmay be
assumed that if the Interpretation which
| YOU now deny, had been sent with the pro-
position to the people of Mississippi, they
never would have acquiesced in it.
The doctrine had its origin in worthy
motives and was used for good purpose,
/ to check the fanaticism which strove for
| hostile legislation; what's commonly called
| the "Wilmot proviso." Though feeble
barrier it was perhaps not wholly useless
and may have served to gain the time ne
| cessary for the people to reflect and to raj
| ly. But he stultities himself who appeals
to the legislation of 1850 to sustain this
modern construction which denies the
| right of Congress to do anythingin relation
to slave property either in the Territories,
States, or District of Columbia. Among
those measures called the compromise,
there was one which on the plea of an un-
| settled question of boundary, transferred
territory from the slaveholding laws of
| Texas to those of New Mexico; another
to give to the Supreme Court of New Mex
leo an appeal in all cases involving titles to
L - II
equal to that which was required in other
cases; another to give more efhcacious
remedy for the recovery of fugtivealaves
found within the limits of the States; an
other which affixed emancipation of the
slave as a penalty upon the owner who
!, should bring him into the District of Co
lumbia, and there keep him with intent to
: sell him at some future time and at some
other place 1t needed not this recent
evasion to make me feel the offence of
{ the last cited act In other times and pla-
l | ces | have said hard and thought harder
( | things of those who thus outraged our
= equality in the neutral territory ceded for
. | the seat of a common government. From
!. | such non-intervention we might pray to
t | be delivered.
l. If the question were fairly submitted to
5 the intelligent minds in any portion of
It our country. shall the general government
e have the means which will enable it to
l. give adequate protection to person and
d property of American citizens on the high
l. seas and wherever on land it has jurisdic-
d ton, ! will not doubt what the answer
d would be. And this confidence is felt
r even by those who adopt delusive phrases
to excite to prejudice; such as the adop-
q ton "of a slave code by Congress" "to
ii force slavery on an unwilling people; y
If and others as unfounded in fact
e Our assertion of right to protection
i does not necessarily involve the enactment
e of additional laws, nor would any laws
n give security unless they were honestly
D. administered.
t. The position so long held by the South
1t that the Constitution as the supreme Law
o. of the land extended to the territories
T. and as it recognized property in slaves SC
L. authorized their introduction into the ter
pe ritories the common domain of the Uni
N ted States. has been affirmed by the Su
preme Court. The decree or public mo-
in municipal law which inhibited slavery il
he all the territory acquired from Mexico
OF was therefore repealed by its transfer t
G. the jurisdiction of the United States, bu
n. if the rules Of proceeding remained un
Id changed then all the remedies of the civi
to law would be available for the protection
of of property in slaves, or if the languag
of of the organic act by specifying chancer
O and common law jurisdiction, denies t
G. us the more ample remedies of the civi
law, then those known to the common
Ie law are certainly in force; and these
le have heen assured by the highest author
ity will be found sufficient. If this be s
IN then we are content. If it should prov
- = I. L
tn cannot deny, the legislation needful I
S. enable the general government to perforl
ie- its legitimate functions and in the inca
st time we deny the power of Congress
la abridge or to destroy our Constitution
at rights: or of the territorial Legislatures
p obstruct the remedies known to the cor
de mon law of the United States.
by If this be the position which it is soucl
70 to render odious by charging us with
re- wish to obtain from Congress the enac
TO ment of "a slave CODE" the abuse of lal
ol- guage is palpable; but if it be intended |
aw the use of that phrase to ascribe to us
aus purpose to ask of Congress the formatic
on of police regulations for slave in the te
ne ritories; by general law to oregulate patrol
to passes, treatment and general dlsciplir
ern of slaves, you know it 30 be utterly III
raj founded and must deem 1t absurd.
the II has been so long the habit to spea
rial of African slavery rs an evil only to /
ON excusad because forced upon us and no
ec- ;rramediable, so many well meaning pc
cry cons have confounded the policy of otht
ltu- times and circumstances with the obligi
his tions of morality, that it has come to pa.
ght that our property in the labor of African
,ra- is regarded as an exception to the gener;
tor obligation of the government to protect
OF and hence the law which have been enac
Eas ed to restrain within prescribed limits
Ia u property which by recognition of the Co,
le, stitution was placed upon the same foo
eu : ing throughout the United States, as 9th,
ne property, the right to hold which is eyer,
uy where recognized by tho common usage
Oh mankind.
We have been sometimes reminded tn,
vas the word slavery" is not to be found
en- the Constitution and it has been assure
IN to be evidence of hostility TO that tenn,
nS of labor which is so denominated
Sls- most illogical conclusion in view of II
ing fact that the Constitution treats Of tb
I0r IT condition not only as an existing right
3N property but as an element in the fltu
e Ine basis OF representation in the general 90
, laS ernment. A more rational deductio
'eu from the avoidance of the term in an i
re- StrnunaOt GO e