The gazette and Democrat. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1860-1860, 1860-10-18

which the Ohio Legislature had 80 recent.
ly refused to declare unlawful; and in its
whole tone and temper counsels peace and
mutual respect Of each others rights be-.
tween States, ipstead Of the maintenance
of = continual and irreprsssible conflict.
1t also has discovered and declares that
the nation has some mission other than
that Of perpetual war over Slavery. And
ESPECIALLY II advances sound old Wbig
doctrine as 10 the fostering care which
Government owes to the industry of its
people. This suits me well. 1t is a re-
currence to first principls-a sircng as.
surance that the party, as n now exists,
intends 10 build up and preserve, and not
to destroy. s',a .a..
Butt do not think Ire adoption Of a
portion Of the Declaration Of Iudepen-
deuce in very good taste, and such indeed
seemed to be the opinion Of majority of
the Convention; but beyond that it is quite
unimportant. The clause adopted is true
in the vague and general sense in which
it was used by the trainers of the Dsclara-
tion, who were three-fourtbs Of them,
Shareholders. And in that sencs Il seems
to have been taken by the ConVen lion; for
if not, it would be inconsistent with their
other resolves, which assert in express
terms the absolute right Of States slave and
free, over their domestic institutions.
object to the eighth resolution. The
proposition ''that the normal condition Of
all the territory of the United States is
that Of freedom is not true in point Of
fact. The rule, the no,naM which is an
nounced BY the proposition, must apply
If it has any meaning to the territory as it
existed al the time of the formation Of the
Constitution, when Slavery existed un
der and by the law of nearly all the States
and in all the Territories, except the ter
litory northwest of the river Ohio; and
as 10 the after acquired territory, the nor
ma or rule must be applied to its eondi-
tion at the moment it became the prop.
erty OF the United States. Aud Louisi-
ana all that is now in question, was then
slave territory. The trainers Of the Con-
stitution had no conception of this nor
mat condition." When tbey willed that
the Northwestern territory should be
free. it was SO declared by the adoption of
the ordinance Of 1887, with its prohlbitory
clause as binding under the Constitution
The South Western Territory was left to
Slavery just where the laws Of North Car
olina and Georgia had held it. The
ships sailing under the flag and carry
ing papers under the seal Of United States
attesting the nationality are, e,wherever tLey
may sail on the high seas, part and par.
Gel of the territories Of the United States
and under the dominion, pure and un-
mixed. of her Constitution and laws.
Now who would be bold enough to
contend that prior to the year 1908, while
the Constitution forbade the abolition Of
the Slave trade, that the normal condi-
lion" ofthe ships which bore the slaves
was that of fIeedom?"
Surely they had no condition whatsvor
except that which the Constitution, and
the laws passed under 1t, created. I feel
il clear 10 demonstration that the prop
osltion as 10 the "normal condition" OF
the territories of the United States in it's
most general or more restricted sense can
not be maintained. The other branch of
the resolution, namely the proposition. that
Congress has but a limited power over
Slavery in the Territories, though ad-
vanced by the Chicago Convention in
this eighth resolution, by the Breckenridge
Convention in their second resolution and
sustained by the Supreme Court Of the
United States IN the case Of Dred Scott
VS.. Sandford, does not command the as
sent of my Judgement, But if the prop.
osition that the power the United States
over the Territories is limited in that par
ticular be true. the Breckinritg ge Couven-
ton and the Supreme Court of the United
States have the best of argument, to say
nothing of authority. But, with all my
habltual Difference and respect for that
Court, and think it second 10 none in
the world for the qualities which give
weight and dignity to judicial tribunal,
I cannot divest myself Of the opinion that
it erred on this point which was quite un'
necessary to the decision of the case.
Their error, in my judgement, consist
in considering slaves as property merely:
instead ofcons;dering master and slave
as relations, which in our artificial system
man holds to man. The latter is the view
taken Of II in the Constitution Of the Uni.
ted States. Slaves in that instrument are
, not treated as property, any more than
minor children, apprentices, or men bound
, by contract to perform a labor. Under
| the Constitution. property is not rerre
sented-perSons owing service are in this
! their laws treat them not as property. II
, property escape from one State and 60 in
to another the Constitution does not di
rect that it shall be delivered up. If per
{ sons owing service, it does so direct
( Congress is empowered to regulate com
/ meice between the States. Commerc,
has to do with property. The States ex
Z ercise the sole power Of admitting or pro
Q hibitipg the importation from other State
Of persons owing service. Congress ha
s the express power to regulate foreign com
i merce, but is denied the power until tn
!. year i8OSto prohibit the migration or i'm
r portatlon into any Of the States now exist
J. ing; Of such persons as the said State ShaI
J. think proper to admit. This implies th
a power to prohibit their importation int
a any new State or into any Territory. an
v the argument also involves this dilemm
d if slaves are property merely, under th
e Constitution, Congress can prohibit thel
importation into any Territory by virtu
!, of its power to regulate commerce betwee
: the States. Ifthey be not property bu