Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1859-10-12
bat exercised under that ahigher iaw'to ma
tons as well as individuals, the law of self

Having thus obtained it by higher law than
the constitution or a law not expressly grant
ed nor necessarily implied, shall we proceed
to settle ii by the higher law notion of the
South, to wit that slavery is the normal
condition. of the negro, (Ham's decendants)
and that JAPHET's 1--WE white folks) are com
manded to make him a servant of servants
forever, or by the higher law n )tion of the
North, that all men are born free and equal,
&c, &c. @t&
II the question is to be thus settled then
certainly Mr.. SEWARD was not far wrong
when he said it was IAN irrepressible conflict,
that must go on until slavery became nation
al or was exiinguished. Now, while i have
admitted that we have obtained territory not
under express grants OF necessarily implied
ones, but by higher law than the constitu-
ton, l do not admit. that we run counter to
the spirit of the fathers in doing SO and deem
it unnecessary to argue that they desired
our national perpetuity, and had they
thought it necessary to that end 10 have in
serted an express grant of power to Congress
TO have sliced or purchased territory, they
would have done it.
And whether it was necessary or not, the
American people through their government
have got this terrotory, and if they believed
it was necessary to national life it is as valid
as if it were really so. though in point OF
fact, we could aud would have survived
without it. As one man may slay another
If he, for good reasons. believe himself in
danger of great bodily harm, probably re-
sulting in death, so may nations not only buy
and conquer territory, but may dispose of the
Inhabitants in snch way as will preserve
their own national existence, not unnecessa-
rally disregardng the rights of humanity
l hold and maintain that in acquiring this
territory, the spirit of those who framed our
constitution sustained us and that it is the
only spirit by which we can put an end to
the conflict which has come with it. And if
We have as ready will to submit to the in
fuence OF their spirit as we have means to
know which it Was, We ought to have no dir
fculiy about it.
At the date of our constitution they did
not maintain the higher law notions of either
section, but they recognized freedom and
slavery both Gust as the Bible dOes) and they
said where slavery exists, it shall be pro-
tected aud that where it does not exist it
shall be prohibited; this they said in reference
to the territory coded by the States and in
accordance with the wishes of the people so
ceding. Now apply this spirit to the settle
ment of territory acquired or that may be
hiblt slavery. In territory coming to us
with slavery protect it, until such territory
assumes sovereignty as State; then leaving
the States as our fathers left them TO control
the subject themselves. II both Of the great
parties would adopt this rule, we might then
move on to investigate and legislate upon
other matters Of great importance to the
public veal, or if one party would adopt il,
with suitable men to represent it, we might
dispense with third party. Such policy
would cause acquisition of territory to be
viewed in a national light and not to be
advocated for sectional supremacy. That
the question is drifting to this principle of
settlement think may be read in the signs of
the times. The doctrine of Squatter Sover-
eighty, though plausible and fiattering to
man. inasmuch as it maintains sovereignty
in him wherever be goes to set up a govern
ment best adapted to his wants, nevertheless,
appears Objectionable both to the North and
South. Some object to IT not because it is
pro-slavery or anti-slaverv but because it
makes the tenure OF all property uncertain,
such though / presume are Federalist aud
doubt to capacity of man for seIt-govern-
ment. The Republican theory Of no more
slave States under any circumstances is en-
phatically sectional. and has seen its best
days. The theory advanced in a reply or re-
view of Mr.. DoUGLAs' great essay, think is
calculated to give more general satisfaction
irrespective of sections than any other and
that it tends to the adoption of the rule |
have indicated. ....
The writer asserts that negro freedom or sla-
very is made by local law and that the status
attaches to the negro wherever he goes or is
carried until he comes in contact with a law
passed by competent authority reversing
il. According TO the law of nations coun-
try acquired by another, retains all its
original laws in full force that do not come
in con fict with the laws of the government
acquiring, and until repealed by the acquir-
ing government. If we acquire country in
which slavery prohibited it is the law until
repealed. and our government having no
power under the constitution to acquire
territory. of course can have none to repeal
a law that does not come in contact with our
laws; only upon the principle that as we
have judged the acquisition necessary, we
must, pass all laws necessary for its proper
government. If we were to pass q law in
regard to slavery and do it in the spirit OF
the fathers, il would be to prohibit slavery in
a country coming to us under law OF free
dom and were none passed it would leave
our courts bound according to the law Of
nations to decide that slave brought into
such territory was free, inasmuch as he had
come in contact with law passed by CON-
petent authority reversing or changing the
status.
If this'b the doctrine advanced by the re-
viewer of Mr. DOUGLAS it puts the legal exist
ence of slavery out of New Mexico in spite of
the Squatters, and asserts that. that is the law
which we would be compelled to enact as
law were we TO follow the spirit Of the fathers
where there is no letter.
= / understand tbs writer TO maintain that
Congress has no power under the Con-
stitutiou to prohibit or establish slavery,
which think is true, but that the spirit of
the fathers followed by the light of their ex-
ample would require the rule have sug
gested 10 be adopted and In the absence Of
any law or rule by Congress the national
Courts would have To decide under the law of
nations. that laws covering acquired terri