Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1860-05-19

r.. Int xe should not have got Kansas at all under
the Missouri compromise Kansas only comes down
to the tbirtyseyenth parallel, the whole Territory
being north Of the Missouri comproms, line. Be-
sides, while New Mexico has legslated in our favor
and the same thing believe, is true of Utah -
Mr. Green wish to correct the Senator in q
matter of fact Utah has not passed any law pro-
tectng slavery. They have an apprentice system,
which expires in very short time. FTF ~
Mr. Clingman. i am. Obliged to the gentleman
for the suggestion; but consider the fact with ref
erence to Utah immateria because it lies on a table
land several thousand feet above the sea, very far
north, reaching up to the forty-seeond parallel and
having very cold climate. Surely. the Senator
does not deny the fact that far New Mexico is
concerned, We have. got everything we desire, and
that it covers more territory than we claimed in
1850. was about to say, though, that even in
Kansas slave property was protected by the Terri
toria legislature for several years, but lately they
have egislated against it. | believe that, but for
the raordinary excitement which grew up out
of the repeal of the Missouri restriction, the Territory
OF Kansas never would have legisated adversely to US
but all know that great crowd were sent in there
from the North. with extreme anti-Slayery views,
and the result of the excitement there has been leg
islation against us; but worse of in that
respect than we had never repealed the restriction
and we are much better off as far the Territory
of New Mexico is concerned, by adopting non-inter
yentiOn. -..r. .. .....a .. g
Mr. Crittenden. Will the gentleman give way to
a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Clingman. As it is late, if there is no OBJ
lection to the reston going over until tomorrow,
it will be more agreeable to me-
Mr. Crittendcn. ! move that the Senate adjourn.
The motion was agreed to and the Senate adj
journed
TUESDAY, MAY 8, 1860.
Mr. President: hope shall not find it nccessa-
~ to occupy much of the time Of the Senate When
| commenced last evening thought should be able
to conclude very soon but finding that the explain
atoms which wished to make would take little
more time than had anticipated. gave way for n
motion to adjourn. | will now express as rapidly,
as can my impressions on this question; and it is,
perhaps, due to myself to say that on the 9th Of
January. 1857. published letter indicating my
views on the whole subject in which took the po-
sition that this government had right and was
bound to protect property in the Territories, but
could not abolish or exclude it. and that Terrific
rial legislature could have no greater power than
Congress. which created the Territory. In that let
ter said: r..
THE right to legslate over the Territories OF the
United States has, by some persons, been derived
from hat clause Of the Constitution which author
lies Congress to dispose Of and make all needul rules
and regulations respecting the territory or other
property of the United States. Others maintain
that incident to the power to admit States,
the right to prepare the Territory for the condition
of State authorizes legislation.
Isneither Of these clauses should he deemed suffi-
cicnt to authorize legislation then il may be con-
tended that in the first place, it must be adj
mitted as n settled matter, that the Government of
the United States is capable Of acquiring territory
by treaty. conquest, discovery. and of holding
exercising authority over the same. But the Gov.
ernment derives all of its powers from the Constitu
ton; and, but for that instrument the President
the Senator's. and members Of Congress, would have
no more power over the Territory than any other
set Of people, three hundred in number
1t is, however universally admitted that the Gov
eminent Of the United States is only trustee Of pow
err agent for the people Of the United States and
must exercise its authority for their benefit. As
the Government derives its power solely from the
Constitution, it cannot 60 beyond that instrument.
and is bound by its limitations therefore. Ii could
NOT for example in the Territory grant titles of no
bility. establish religion, abridge the freedom #
speech OF Of the press, &c Whichever Of the three
sources Of power he assumed the true one it
seems clear that Congress and the President, in
holding the territory, exercising jurisdiction it.
can only legiSlate tn the extent required to protect
the interest of the Government and Of the people of
the United States. The preservation of lis own
property, and the protection Of the property and
personal rights Of the people limit the extent Of its
powers It is bound however, to legisate, or make
needful rules to that extent
4. B. enters the Territory with his wife, child horse
and slave These are taken away from him BY force
and he is himself imprisoned. Now. it is obvious
that there should be laws to protect his own liberty
and also his right to the possession Of his WIFE child
horse, and slave. Hence. it follows that there
must be power in Congress to legislate the sub
ject of slavery well in relation to wives. chill.
dren, and horses. 1t is clear that the Government
has power to protect these rights Can il go frth-
err: The Constitution declares, that private prop
crty shall not he taken for public use (even) without
just compensation The Government cannot, there
FORE take any property or, what is the same thing
release another from obligation to me- which is
in the nature Of property. While it may protect,
it cannot destroy personal rights.
IL must be remembered, however, that every slave
in the United States is necessarily the property Of
some person; but as the Government OF the United
States cannot destroy or take away property it can
not, Of course, change the relation of any one IN
these respects If person is under obligation to serve
me for life, shorter term he cannot be released
from that obligation by Congress. because it cannot
take my property by any law that pass whether
the law is to operate in State or Territory In the
latter 1t is hound to preserve that is protect existing
rights; but it cannot destroy them. IT. therefore
its power is limited to the preservation of rights now
in being, such law MS the Missouri compromise
which would destroy rights that already exist in
certain citizens, would he unconstitutional since it
might and in fact must, necessarily interfere with
property in slaves. II seems to Inc that these prop
ostions cover the whole ground of controversy and
hence, if they are held to be true Congress cannot
except for public use, and with Just compensa-
tion deprive any person Of obligation on anoth-
er, or declare that the owners right tn his slave
shall not be recognized in any Territory of the Uni
ted States And if Congress has not the power it.
SELF then it cannot delegate it. and hence the Kan
sas Nebraska bill does not carry with it any such
power" ID .. ...r
yesterday alluded to the opinions of Mr.. Cal
houn 1t is perhaps right that should say that in
the very same speech from which read, he express
sed the opinion that Territorial Legislature had
right to exclude slavery, or to egislate against
it. | concur with him in that He also, think
almost uniformly, perhaps invariably, held that Con-
gress had right and ought to protect all property