Litchfield enquirer., 1860-03-01
EXTRACT FROM THE SPEECH OF Hos. o. S. FERRY IN THE HOUSE
 OF REPRESENTATIVES,, FEB. 10.

HoN. O. FERRY IN THE HOUS]
 OF REPRESENTATIVES,, FEB. Il 1860. ..- t--n.zf -..-F s.s
 The prevalent opinion among those wh
 framed the Constitution of this Governmep
 was that, in political economy, slavery wa to be.regarded as an evil; to some extent indeed, necessary evil, in communitie
 where it had existed for many generations
 and become interwoven with the social hat
 it's and business interests; but still an evil whose peaceable and legal removal was a
 object of earnest desire. In relation to it
 original establishment in new society, tn
 opinion was more decided; such establish
 ment was justly considered great mora
 wrong, sin against God, and crime agains
 humanity, as we'll as repugnant to the prin
 ciples of sound political economy. An,
 such continued to be the general opinion o
 the country for more than generation aftc
 the adoption of the Constitution. I shaI
 not weary the House with quotations in con
 irmation of these statements; the proofs O their correctness will readily occur to all in telligent men. The Democratic party of to day denounces these sentiments as false and fanatical. It holds, as an abstract proposi tion, that property in man exists of natura right; no more to be condemned in morals ol deprecated in policy than property in cattle or merchandise; that the system of Ameri can slavery, which is based upon this prop erty in man, is also, and without reference to collateral circumstances, right-right, not merely where it exists as an involuntary in. heritancc from preceding generations, but rightfully to be originally established in a community, as component part of it's do nestle institutions. And not only this, but that, as a system, it is expedient; product. i've of vast benefits where it already exists, and calculated to produce the greatest good in societies where, under favoring influences of soil and climate, it may be newly cstab- lished
 The Democratic party, moreover, insists that this property in man is distinctly recog- nised and protected by the Constitution of the United States; that whenever the term " property" is used in that instrument, it en- braces slaves as truly as any object of legiti- mate ownership; and that every conclusion of legal or logical sequence from the language of the Constitution, which may apply to mer- chandise of any description, is equally appli- cable to this am aware that there is a section of the Democratic party which does not concur in all of the foregoing views, and shall have occasion to consider its position in the course of my remarks. The influence of this portion in public affairs is, however, at present, comparatively small. The Exec utive department of the Government, the Democratic members of the Federal Judicia- ry. and an overwhelming majority of the Democratic members of both houses of Con gress, embrace the opinions which I have now stated. In tie discussions in the other wing of the Capitol, and upon this floor, l have heard these doctrines set forth scores of times as component parts of the Demo- cratic creed, and they have been received al- most without word of disapprobation from any ono claiming 10 belong 70 the Democrat ic organization. Indeed, think that it may properly be assumed that, ,.but for the stern resistance which is made to these principles by the Republican party, they would be carried out. in all their logical re- suits, by all the departments of the Federal Government. It is proper, therefore, that I should briefly indicate those results.
 In the first place, then, if these principles be correct, there is no justification or palia- tion for the laws of the United States against the African slave trade. If property in man, as in merchandise, exists of natural right, if it's establishment in new communities is just and expedient, if the Constitution applies to it the same universal guaranty which it ap- plies to all objects of legitimate ownership, then human beings are as proper an article of commerce as cotton; the statute which declares the slave trade piracy is hideous iniquity, and its execution would be judicial murder. Again, assuming the correctness of the principles already enunciated, it is the imperative duty of Congress to provide forth with, by further legislation. for the protec- tion of property in slaves in the Territories of the United States. Whateser else may be said of this species of property, it is cer- tainly true that it is regarded by the great. CT portion of Christendom with peculiar re- pugnance. The emigration which flows into the Territories is very largely composed ol men who share in this :eeling, and the con. sequence has been that shareholders have felt that their estate in their human chsttels was entirely insecure, when once removed beyond the protection of State sovereignty. To say that the Constitution guaranties to the own. CT of property the absolute enjoyment of his rights therein, throughout the Federal pos sessions. and then to refuse remedy for the violation of those rights, is but 6 solemn tmockery. Nor is this all. The same req aoning necessarily iuterposes the limitations of the Constitution against the capacity o
 the people of a Territory to abolish slavery
 when they come to make their State Consti
 tution; aud every State in this Union, whict has emerged from the Territorial condition since l7s9, and, in so doing, has incorpora
 ted into it's Constitution what think may properly call the anti-slavery clause, is to-day
 in its legal condition, according sto this ex position of the Constitution of the United
 Statts, as much 8 slave State as South Car
 olna or Georgia. For where, may ask did the people, in their Territorial condition
 as they must have been while in the act Q
 making their Constitution. acquire thoir pow
 CT to abolish slavery within their borders
 From any inherent right so to do? This
 vehemently denied2 From any act of Con gress? Itis expressly affirmed that Congress
 can confer no such power. From the Cor
 stitntion of the United States? The answe l is an unqualified negative, Whence, then
 does this power comel The gentleman fFor
 Texas, Mir Reagan. in his very abl
 speech. gave the only answer of which. .upo the Democratic theory. the question is SD!