Bedford inquirer. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1857-1884, 1860-08-24

{ point that slavery, In the States IN which 1t
existed, was a matter of State regulation ex-
clusively. Congress had not the least power
over it. sAll ag.ations and attempts to disturb
the relations between master and slave by per-
sons not living in he slave States, are uncon-
stiutioDal in their spirit, and productive OF
evil and mischief No patriot should counte-
nance them. The regulation of slavery is with
the States where it exists-the responsibility,
if there be any, is there.
| But our opponents are not satisfied with the
recognition of these Constitutional rights. 10
a speech delivered bv President Buchanan,
from the executive mansion, at the opening of
the present campaign, it is coDtended that this
old Wing doctrine of non-oxtension of slavery,
deprVes our Southern brethren of their rights
in the territories. That, as the territories
were acquired by the common service and
common exertious of all-that they have the
right to carry their slaves 'as slaves into the
new territories, or as the President states it,
sApy set of Principles which will deprive you
of yOur property is against the very essence of
Republican Government, and to that extent
makes YOU slave
| The argument of Mr. Buchanan is not ori-
| gual. Ii was urged by another with great
| force in the Senate in 1913, and was thus an
swered by Daniel Webster in his speech on
the exclusion of slavery from the territories ,
ssThey say that in this way we deprive them of
the opportunity of going into this acquired territory
with their property. ''Their property" What do
they mean by property!' We certainly do not de-
prve them of the privilege Of going into this newly
acquired Territories with all that, in the general
estimate of human society, in the general and COM
mon and universal understanding Of mankind, is
esteemed property. Not at all. The truth is just
1 Thavh hava in air tate
which create property in persons. They have a
system of local legislation which slavery rests;
while every body agrees that it is against natural
law, or, at least against the common understanding
which prevails among men, to what is natural
/ law.
s'The Southern States have peculiar laws, and by
those laws there is property in slaves. This pure
| y local. The real meaning, then, of Southern gen.
tlemen in making this complaint, is, that they
not go lnto the Territories OF the United States
carrying with them their peculiar local law a
! law which creates property iu persons. This, ac-
cordlng to their own statement. is ali the ground Of
complaint they have. Now here, think, gentle
men, they are unjust towards us. How unjust they
ase others will judge generations that win come
after US viii judge. 1t viii not be contended that
this sort of personal slavery exists by general law.
/ 1t exists only by locallaw. l do not to deny
the validity of that local law where t is established
but l say it is, after all, local law. 1t is nothing
more. And wherever that local law does not extend
property in persons does not exist Well, sir what
is now the demand the part OF our Southern
friends! They say: We will carry our local law
with us wherever we go. We insist that Congress
does injustice unless it establishes it in the Tor
ritories in which wish to go with our own local
law. This demand for one resist, and shall resist
1t goes upon the idea that there is an inequality
unless persons under this local law. and holding
property by authority Of that law can go into new
territory and there establish that Local law to the
exclusion of the general law.
f'Now, our friends seem to think that an inedual-
ty arises from restraining them from going into the
Territories, unless there be law provided which
| shall protect their ownership in persons. The as
sertion is, that we create inequality. Is there
nothing to be said the other side in relation to
| inequality? Sir, from the date OF this Constitution
and in the eounsels that formed and established this
Constitution, and suppose in all mems Judgment
since, it is received as settled truth that slave
labor and free laber do not exist well together
have before me a declaEetion of Mr. Mason, in the
Convention that formed the Constitution, to that
| effect. Mr. Mason, as is well known, was diStin-
guished member from Virginia He says that the
objection to slave labor is, that it puts free white
labor in disrepute that it causes labor to be regard
ed derogatory TO the character Of the free white
man, and that the free white man despises to work
TO use bis expression, where slaves are EMPLOYED
This is matter OF great interest the free States
If be true, as TO great extent it certainly is chat
wherever slave labor prevails free white labor is ex
cluded or discouraged. / agree that slave labor
does not necessarily exclude free labor totally
! other States, where most of the labor is done by
slaves. But it necessarily loses some of its re spect
ability, by the side of, and when associated with
slave labor Wherever labor is mainly performed
by slaves, it is regarded degrading to freemen-
/ The freemen of the North, therefore, have deem
interest keeping labor free exclusively free, in
/ the new Territories.
ssBut, sir let US look further into this alleged in
4 equality. There is pretence that southern peo-
pie may not go into Territory which shall be subject
to- fha rdi nf rht lx-
that they shall not carry slaves thither and continue
that relation. They say this shuts them altogether
1 out. Why, sir, there can be nothing more inaccu
rate in point OF fact than this statement. under
stand that one half the people who settled Illinois
I are people, or descendants of people, who came
4 from the Southern States. And suppose that one
third of the people of Ohio those, descend
ants of those, who emigrated from the South. And
venture to say that in respect to those two States
they at this day settled by people of southern
origin in as great a proportion they are by peo-
pie Of northern origin according to the general
numbers aud proportion of the people, South and
North. There are as many people from the South,
Ia proportion TO the whole people of the whole
south, In those States, there from the North
IN proportion TO the whole people of the North
There is, then, 10 exclusion of southern people;
there is only the exclusion Of peculiar local law.
Neither in principle in fact is there any nequal-
ity
The question, whether il was not competent
for Congress TO prevent its further increase was
met and answered by the same authority 10 the
same year. Congress shas full power over the
subject. 1t may establish any such government
aud aBy such laws In the Territories as 10 its
discretion it may see fit.' This was certainly
the opinion of VIM. Pinkney, as derived from
his celebrated argument on the Missouri ques-
ton, when he expressed the hope that the whole
subject might be disposed of by .proscript,ve
prohibition Of slavery in the Territory north
and Oest of Missouri
Does Mr. Lincoln proclaim any new doc>