Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1860-04-06

ries. suffered to remain. The fact that it had |
been taken there and existed there was
deemed an indication of its adaptation and
local utility. Where slavery did not in fact |
exist to any appreciable extent, it was by |
Congress expressly prohibited, so that IN
either case, the country settled up without
any difficulty or doubt as to the character OF
its institutions. In no instance was this diff
fcut or disturbing question left to the peo-
pie who might settle in the Territories, to be
there an everlasting bone of contention as
long as the territorial government existed. 1t
was regarded as a subject in which the whole
country had an interest, and therefore I'M
proper for local legislation.
To illustrate this, | will not 90 OF with
the history of governmental action from time
to time, as Congress made different terrific
rial governments in the country northwest OF
the Ohio. 1 need not show how they con-
tinued to repeat over and over again the ut
ter prohibition of slavery but | will call
attention to the act which has been remark
ed upon by the Senator from Georgia, in
relation to Mississippi. AS to Tennessee,
we all know that North Carolina in making
the cession of the Territory to the United
States, prohibited them from doing anything
tending to the abolition of slavery. In re
lation to Mississippi, do not understand the
action of Congress exactly as the gentleman
from Georgia presents it. The truth is. that
the United States claimed large part of that
country. now forming Alabama and Miss s.
sippi, and Georgia claimed nearly the whole
of It, When the Mississippi territorial act
was passed, in 1898, it was formed in antici-
patton of, and it appointed a way of fixing
commissioners for, the settlement of that
dispute with Georgia. The territory was
settled, as far as it was settled. with slave
holders and slaves. 1t was expected that
Georgia. in making her cession. would do as
North Carolina had done in relation to Ten
nessee. That territorial act of 1898 remained
unexecuted until 1902. In 1902, the COM
missioners of Georgia made settlement with
the United States. and then the United States
agreed to pay Georgia 81 $50 900, for which
she auit-claimed all her right, claim, and
title, with certain reservations and,
amongst other things, she put IN clause
forbidding the extension of the anti-slavery
clause of the ordinance Of 1877 over that
territory. They made their grant on that
condition.
What does that show The Senator from
Georgia says
'In 1898, when Congress legislated in Treation
to Mississippi Territory they did not prohibit
slavery
No, Sir, it was already there actually
established, and it was expected that GeOr-
gia would insist on keeping it there,
and she did insist on keeping it there
| But that was not all The United States
then, in that very act, prohibited the impOr-
: tation Of slaves from abroad, though they
could not prohibit it in the rest of the Unit
I'D States until 1908 By what power did
Congress do that ? Certainly they received
no power for it from the provision of the
Constitution that "the migration of lmpOr-
tation of such persons az any of the States
: now existing shall think proper to admit
shall not be prohibited by Congress prior to
r the year 1905" That did not give them any
power about it except to prohibit it in all the
States after ls0S but they they did proceed
S to prohibit the introduction of slaves INTO
the Mississippi Territory in 1893. Why
Simply for the same reason that they did
2 the rest they considered themselves as pos
5 sessing the power in framing territorial
! governments. TO frame them in such a way,
t and with such prohibitions and conditions as
1 they thought would best promote the inter
d ests of the nation. They derived the pow
e er. no doubt. at that time, from that clause
d Of the Constitution called the territorial
d clause. by which they were empowered &c
I make all needfu rules and regulations fol-
r. the Territories. None other can be found
There cannot be found a clause in the Con
It stitution which gave them the power, unless
r. 1t was that | know that it is said, with
e regard TO Louisiana and other acquisition:
g. obtained by treaty with foreign nations, in
= asmuch as they have power to acquire, they
+ have the necessarily incidental power TO gov
= ern but that cannot apply to Mississippi
e 1t was not acquired by treaty from a foreign
d nation at all They exercised the power there
2 under the territorial clause.
o Again, when our country made the LOUIS
{. lana purchase from France, in the first &C
r forming the territorial Government of Orlean
q Territory. now Louisiana. which was in $50;
D. or 1904, Congress did not prohibit slavery
e because it was already there, and because i
e was adapted to the country, | suppose the,
h thought They suffered it, but they did no
$ leave it so. They provided that no slave
n should 90 in there except in families for set
Element; and in the next place, they provided
n that no slave should be taken in there in an
g way that had been imported into the United
e States after 1898 why 1898? In l79,
2 they passed that Mississippi act prohibitin!
e the importation Of slaves from abroad int,
h Mississippi They soon learned that it af
d forded very little security to keep out import
II ed slaves from Mississippi, when they coulC
e be imported into Georgia and taken over int,
: Mississippi. Congress, therefore, provided, il
e the act for Orleans Territory, that no slave
II should be taken in there in any way, in fam
e lilies or in any other way that had been i'm
s. ported after 1898 Now, | would ask, die
= not the people of South Carolina or Georgia
Y or any other saveholding State-and grea
o many of them were such at that time-owr
| a. ,rb 81 boI al
It Africa in 1900, and in 1901, and 1902, anC
d 1908, Just as they owned any other slaves
e they held? If any of them were property
were not those slaves property? Clearly they
l. were. Well, then, how did Congress have
E, a right to prohibit their taking them int
1t Louisiana? Thy did exercise the power
T. and no man doubted it. 1t remained for fifty
= years. and no man questioned it.
y FALSE PRETENsE THAT IN THE MISSOURI COM
n PROMISE ACT THE NORTH ENCRoACH-
: ED ON THE SOUTH.
q The gentlemen from Virginia (Mr Hum
g ERR in the course of this session spoke of tina
t. as being northern aggression and he made
:; a discovery new to me, when he supposed
n the North made the line. The truth is the
e Sonth made that line. lido not say that NJ
northern men voted for it. There were
n very few, enough, with the southern votes
a to make majority; but the great body, the
n majority, of its supporters were southern
h men. They made it. l actually heard with
n establishment the honorable Senator from
a Virginia put that down as one of the north.
| ern aggressions. That is new discovery tc
r. me. To my mind. that is very much like
: the man of whom / heard during the Cana
: dian difficulties, who said he was willing tc
e go over there and help the Canadians to fght
: the British any time; and when asked why,
n he said, "the British are always pecking at
S somebody at one time they came into Boston
. and threw all our tea into the harbor, and
e we have not got over that yet" daughter. J
d I think this is about as new a reading of
n history as that. But, sir, what purpose had
that com nrnmisa line ansWerad What bod