The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1860-03-28
-

ted 70 C1n8u8 Dy the uIfuefgTOunQ TalITOal
The colonial statistics show that thousant
and thousands of slaves have been carried frol
the slaveholding States of this Union and 3,
GREETED in Canada, and it is vain that we con
plain to this government. Suppose that I'll
agents of the underground railroad were
boast every morning that last night they cal
ried away seventeen head Of horses from Ne'
York, one hundred head of horned cattle from
Illinois, and five hundred sheep from Micni
gan; suppose the underground railroad m "a -
gers were constantly Boosting, IN reelen 49,
your property, that Canada was 60 What
- - -. t,om New York say
Mouio lhe oena.oT yarI berselfsay? What
"h.s "ouio Nem -siayehoIding States say ?
srSs-.-e..,5 - 10 the President and demand
ne w S:sohsroe his duty, by notifying the
I .,las nc Ge-srnment that, unless the stolen
plIsas ..S ms given up, non intercourse would
+. dsclered, and If its colonly persisted in re.
ss;e;nr and concealing the stolen goods Of
American citizens, this Government would
resent the outrage, even by the shedding OIL
blood.
appeal to the Senator from New York,
Mr.. Seward, whether he does not know that
that state Of things would be produced il
Northern property was taken instead of ours;
yet he expects US to stand still and see our
property carried off, q million dollars worth Of
it every year, and if we appeal to him, he
turns upon us with aderisive laugh, and walks
away. Are we not your equals in the Con-
federation Have we not the same right to
claim the protection Of the Government for
our property that you have fer yours?
know not sir, what other men would do but II
l had the power, the sun should not 20 down
until would file notice with the British
minister accredited to this Government that,
unless Canada yielded up the stolen negroes,
as she would be compelled to yield up stolen
horses, cattle, or anything else, this Govern
.ment would declare non-intercnnrse, and i!
that remedy was not efficient, this Govern
ment would declare war. She has no more
right to conceal my stolen negroes than she
has TO conceal your stolen goods; and | have
the same reason to complain of her that you
would have. My complaint goes unheeded,
yours would be listened to.
But, say gentlemen on our side. in your ap-
peals for protection through the direct agency
of Congress, you are departing from the recog-
nized doctrine of the plrty-the doctrine Of
non Intervention. Sir this argument, so often
resorted to, has produced deeper and more
lasting impression on the public mind than all
else that has been said on that subject. 1t has
made its impression in the South, in the West,
in the East, and in the North and will en-
deavor to answer it. 1t is true that we did
agree to the doctrine of non-intervention as
applied to the points then in dispute Those
points were the Wilmot proviso, and the doc
trine that Territorial Legislature might prop
erly exclude slavery; we denying the power
OF Congress or the power Of q Territorial Le-
gislature to accomplish this result; our oppo-
nents on the republican side, and some on the
democratic side, asserting that Congress had
the power but the large majority of the
Northern democrats taking the ground that a
Territorial Legislature could accomplish this
end, and most Of the Southern men DENYING
It We were asked, why not allow Congress
to act and to affirm the power, and then, if
you are right in believing that act is unconsti-
tutional, take your appeal to the Supreme
Court and have the act oyerthrown? Our re-
ply was, We do not want to go before the court
with the force of congressional opinion
against us; we neither ask you to affirm our
doctrine, nor allow that you shall affirm your
own; we are willing to go before the court
unoppressed BIZ the expression of any opinion
one way or the other by Congress. To this
extent we are for non-intervt ntion; DO not in
terpose your authority against US, and we are
content that you shall not interpose it in our
favor on these two points -
Well SIR, what have we done We have
been before the court, and the court has af-
frIned our side Of the question The court
has determined that Congress has no power
to exclude slavery from the Territories. It
has affirmed more: that Congress can confer
no such power on Territorial Legislature:
and that Territorial Legislature having no
other powers than those which it derives from
Congress, and Congress having no power to
confer this authority, it cannot be exercised by
a Territorial Legislature. And thus. our
side Of the two propositions has been affirmed:
non-interventon has been worked cut to its
legitimate and proper conclusion; the doctrine
IS at an end; the case has been fully met. has
been entirely settled; and, at this point. the
Senator from Illinois comes in with an alto
gether new doctrine doctrine never heani
OF before, to which our agreement never could
have applied, because it was not then in exis-
tence-the doctrine that q Territorial Leeis-
lature, by unfrisndiy action, and by doing
nothing, may as eHectually exclude us as
Congress could by direct legislation. Still, it
Is affirmed that all of us-I have seen the
statement made very often in the newspapers,
heard it affirmed by members of Congress and
to prove it-that we all agreed that Congress
never should interpose in defence of Slave
property in Territory; that we all agreed to
leave the whole question to the people of the |
Territory; that we all agreed that if the peo-
pie thought proper to have slaves, they might |
have them; and if they thought proper not to |
have them, then they were not to be taken |
there. never agreed to any such thing
BY way Of proving that last declaration, |
beg leave to call the attention of Senator'S very
briefly, to some Of my former declarations on |
this point. In speech pronounced by me in /
the House Of Representatives, on the Sd day |
Of june, 1848, used this language. After |
discussing the whole territorial question, | |
said i:
The conclusion, Mr. Chairman, to which |
my own mind has arrived on the several points
involved are briefly these: That every citizen
OF the United States may go to the Territories
and take with him his property, be it slaves Or
any other description Of property. That nei-
ther the United States Congress nor Terri
torial Legislature has any power or authority
to exclude hum /; and that the power Of legis,
iaron, by whomsoever exercised in the Terri
torres. whether by Congress or the Territorial
Legislature, must be exertedfor the equal ben
efit Of all, for the Southern STAKEHOLDER no less
than for the Northern dealer in drygoods"
That doctrine / affirmed on the Sd day of
June, 1S48. l reaffirm it in the resolutions
upon your table to-day, sir, to which am ad-
dressing myself Now, viii run hastily over
other remarks Of mine, to show you that
have never, at any time, departed in the slight
est possible degree from this doctrine On the
18th OF February, 1850 in reviewing speech
pronounced by then eminent Senator from
Michigan, now the Secretary of State, upon
ms favonte doctrine of squatter sovereignty.
am reported to have used this language:
General Cass had Of Mr.. B. understood
hm) ayowed his opinion to be, that the peo-
pie Of the Territories have the right to exclude
slavery; and he was understood to sustain
the action OF the people Of California in form
ing State government Against all these
parts Of the speech Of General Cass. he (Mr.
b entered his solemn protest"
But ne understood General Cass as going
further than this-to the extent of giving to ]
the people Of the Territories the right 10 ex-
ciude slavery during their territorial existence
and, indeed, before government of a2y sort
had been established by Congress. He un-
1erstood the doctrine as advanced by General ..
Iass to be- that the occupants Of the soil
where no government existed-as in New
A-OA-(Sp OoAtSAAla1 DCoStGty 0C.-u81 ElG
ight to exclude slavery, and against this doc
rine he raised his humble voice; and although
le might stand alone, without one other
southern representative to sustain him, he
yould protest against it to the last"
Again, on the 18th of May, 1850, used
his language: II
Il admit the right Of selfgoyernment; i
Omit that every people may regulate their
Domestic affairs in their own way; freely and d
ally admit the doctrine that a people, finding :
themselves IN country without laws. NAV
make laws for themselves, and to suit them I
elves. But, IN doing this, they must take
are not to infringe the rights Of the owners ;,
nd proprietors Of the soil. IT, for EXAMPLE
me hundred or one thousand American Eth o :,
ems should find themselves thrown on an i. .
and belonging TO Great Britain. uninhaIited
md without laws, such citizens, from the VERY "
necessity Of their position, would have right
o make laws for themselves. But. in DONG
his, they would have no right to saw to her a
dajesty's subjects in Scotland, you mar come
o this island with your property; and 10 her