Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1860-04-06

was this, as the whole lesson of our history
will show, where slavery was actually exist
ing in the country TO any considerable or gen
eral extent, it was, though somewhat modified
in Mississippi and Orleans Territories, suffer-
ed to remain. The fact that it had boon taken
there and existed there was deemed an iudi-
cation Of its adaptation and local utility
Where slavery did not in fact exist to any ap-
precabe 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 It's institutions. In no in
stance was this difficult or disturbing ques-
ton left to the people who might settle in the
Territories, to be there an everlasting bone of
contention as long as the territorial govern
mont existed. II was regarded as a subject
in which the whole country had an interest,
and therefore improper for local legislation
To illustrate this, will not 90 on with the
history of governmental action from time TO
time, as Congress made different territorial
governments in the country northwest of the
Ohio. | need not show how they continued
to repeat over and over again the utter pro-
hibiton Of slavery but ] win call attention
TO the act which has been remarked upon by
the Senator from Georgia, in relation 90 Mis-
sissippi. As to Tennessee, we all know that
North Carolina, in making the ccssion of the
territory to the United States prohibited them
from doing anything tending TO the abolition
of slavery. In relation to Mississippi. | do
not understand the action Of Congress exact
ly as the gentleman from Georgia presents it.
The truth is, that the United States claimed
a large part Of that country now forming Al
ALBANIA and Mississippi, and Georgia claimed
nearly the whole Of it. When the Mississip
It.s .tt...s
formed in anticipation of, and it appointed a
way Of fixing commissioners for. the settle
ment Of that dispute with Georgia. The ter
ritory was settled, as far as it was settled,
with shareholders and slaves. 1t was expect
ed that Georgia, in making her cession, would
do as North Carolina had done in relation to
Tennessee. That territorial act Of l79s re-
mained unexecuted until 1902 In 1902, the
commissioners of Georgia made settlement
with the United States, aud then the United
States agreed to pay Georgia Sl,25O 900, for
which she qut-claimed all her right, claim,
and title, with certain reservations and,
amongst other things, She put in a clause for
bidding the extension of the anti-slavery
clause of the ordinance Of 7S7 over that ter
ritory. They made their grant on that con-
dition. What does that show The Sena-
tor from Georgia says:
In lbs when Congress leg.laod in relation to Miss
issippi Territory, they did not prohibit slavery"
no, sir, it was already there; actually es-
tablished, and it was expected that Georgia
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 importation Of slaves from
; abroad, though they could not prohibit it in
j the rest of the United States until 1903. By
= what power did Congress do that; Certain
ly they received no power for il from the pro-
vision Of the Constitution that the migration
; or importation Of such persons as any of the
States now existing shall think proper to ad-
nit shall not be prohibited by Congress prior
to the year lsOS' That did not give them
, any power about it except to prohibit it in all
the States after 1908 bat they did proceed
to prohibit the introduction of slaves into the
Mississippi Territory in 1898. Whyi Sim
| ply for the same reason that they did the rest.
they considered themselves as possessing the
! power, in framing territorial governments, TO
, frame them in such way, and with such pro-
hbItions and conditions, as they thought
= would best promote the interests of the ma
ton. They derived the power, no doubt, at
that time, from that clause of the Constitution
/ called the territorial clause, by which they
were empowered to make all needful rules and
, regulations for the Territories. None other
can be found There cannot be found a clause
IN the Constitution which gave them the pow
er, unless it was that. know that it is said.
with regard to Louisiana and other acquisi-
tons obtained by treaty with foreign nations.
inasmuch as they have power to acquire, they
have the necessarily incidental power to gov
ern but that cannot apply to Mississippi 49,
I T.
nation at all. They exercised the power there
under the territorial clause.
Again, when our country made the Louis
lana purchase from France in the first act
forming the territorial government of Orleans
Territory, now Louisiana, which was in 1903,
or 1904 Congress did not prohibit slavery;
because it was already there, and because it
was adapted to the country, | suppose they
thought. They suffered it, but they did not
leave it so. They provided that no slaves
should go in there except in families for
settlements aud in the next place, they
provided that no slave should be taken in
there in any way that had been imported into
the United States after 1898 Why l79S
In 1893 they passed that Mississippi act pro-
hibiting the importation Of slaves from abroad
into Mississippi. They soon learned that it
afforded very little security to keep out
imported slaves from Mississippi, when they
could be imported into Georgia and taken over
into Mississippi. Congress, therefore, prosi-
ded, in the act for Orleans Territory, that no
slave should be t,ken in there in any way,
in families or in any other way, that had
been imported after 1898. Now, would
ask, did not the people Of South Carolina, or
Georgia, or any other slaveholding State-and
a great many Of them were such at that time
own their slaves which they had imported
from Africa in 1900, and 1901, and SO2. and
1903, just as they owned any other slaves
they held II any of them were property,
we.e not those slaves properity' Clearly
they were. Well, then, how did Congress
have right to prohibit their taking them
into louisiana They did exercise the power,
and no man doubted it. 1t remained for iiny
years, and no man questioned it.
1t is unnecessary, in order to show what
was the power, then understood by them.
that they should, on all occasions, have pro-
hibited slavery entirely. The fact that they
did not do that does not show that they had
not the power to do it. No, Mr. President,
power to regulate is power to prohibit.
Nothing is more fully settled, for instance,
than that the mower tn repulnte commerce. il