, 1860-01-09
SHOULD THE NOGsT'H Do WHAT
til 6 SUCTH a:ElA NOT3

4Ee 1aaostoleE1aI pIluclpic On Which the pro-
slavery Democracy insist 1hut they have a
right to carry their negroes into all the terri
tories Of the onion aud plant slnyery there, is
that slaves ars property III the same sense that
oxeu, sheep and asses are property. Tkis doc
tsicc was clf.c:ual'y exploded by Nr. Douglas
himsclf III :. speech in 1910 or 80, but it is
convenient for him and his friends now to for
get tho sound constitutional principles which
he tI.ca cnuneiasel- Tho principle that slaves
nre simply p:op,r'y, forms the basis Of action
under the Fugitive slavo law. Granting for a
'nesnent, for Tue sake ofthe argument that they
arc 60 in every seusc, look ut the 1nonstrous
assumptions under which their owucrs assert
their claitas. They Insist that all the power
ef the General Government shau be used to
c.tca and restore their particular kind Of pro-
petty. No. only must the government do the,
catching at lis owu charges, but it must i'm:
poso dncs and imprisonment upon ill who
caanot Or will uct do this mean and "dirtv,
work"
Three Of the mos. respectable citizens Of our
own State are low hcforo tho United Suites
Court charged with sins Of omission and COM
mission under the Fugitive Slave law The
ncyro ''Jim," was claimcd to be tic property
Of citizen Of Missouri. The United States
Government inaic.s pains aud penalties upon
our citizens because they did not siczo the
fugac:ous 'iniggeE.'' Nov suppose tla. fifty head
Of clttle owned 1'y these citizens Of Ottawa
had mado L stampede for Missouri, would the
e. S. Marshal, at Tie expense Of tue Govern.
meut, pursue aud restore lhesn to their owners
incioscrs at Ottawa: Would not the owners
Of tho cattlo hive been left to do their own
catching aud Ut lLcir owu c4,st and charges?
Nowi it is the that slaves are property and
tllas tho Govc-aua .at Is u luv boand to use
all its power aud I'LL its money wI.cuever a
"niEger gels loose to catch lsn, why is it
no! equally imperative fur the Government 10
ca:.a property witt, Gour legs as well us two?
Is it not plainly alsnrd that tie Government
shoall as>t'a's the responsibility Of guarding;
tho property Of one section while it utterly ig-
nures that responsibility in tho other? Why
should twenty-five millions Of men who hold
no slaves he taxed 10 catch llc "1,i;;.crs' Of
few lauu1scd Thousand WHO are Lie patr;-
arcls Of tue "pecu1iar iustituliou?''
Granting for the moment that the Fugitive
Slave Law is constitutional; that "1oose mig
gcs" should be restored to tho service Of his
master, we do Insist that t!Io cost ol his al,-
preheusio shoull be borne by his master
Still more, that free men who havo no taste for
tho "dirty work." should not be forced to en-.
gage in it. "southcrn gentlemen" have again
and again asserted that they would not aprre-
hend fugitive That disreputable business
is committed to tbs "poor white trash,'' who
are but too willing to do the bidding of tic
lordly Shareholder. Why should Northern
gentlemen bo;forocd to do what the owners Of
slares would not?
It may be said tia: slave property would de-
prec;atc onc-lalt. if ale T.. S. Government
did not step in to protect it. That is the busi-
ness Of the owners, not the concern Of North
ern ircelncn. II tic South chocso to deal in
that kind Of property which uses its legs to
run awayy, Let them take the consequences; but
don't call on Northern paop'c, either to engage
in tho racc u 10 foot the Lill Of costs:
t--- ="