The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1860-08-18
Ease FORGERY. SC.

that, according to that decision, it is the |
duty Of Congress to protect Slavery IN the |
territories As an instance, we gave the
manner in which the editor of the lFtg,rane
had quoted that decision. He quoted
these words:
"Now, as we have already said in an
earlier part of this opinion upon differ
cnt point, the RIGHT ofPROPERTI in a
stare i distinctly and expressly qHTrncd III the
Constitution x K The only two provi-
sions which point to them (slaves) include
them and treat them as property and make
it the DUTY of GOVERNMENT to PRO
TECT If"
We said this was such misquotation
and pcryersion OF the real language of the
Court, as TO amount to falsehood; nay,
that it was no better than forgery, mas
much as it omitted the all important If,
to wit: "If the slave escapes from his ow
ner, which entirely changed the mean
ing OF the sentence. We accused the
editor, however of 10 intentional mean
ness Yin the matter, but charitably supposed
he had been mi-led-
We are now satisfied, however, that our
charity was thrown away: for after sleep
Ing on the matter two weeks, Claudius es-
says reply, which is so palpably quibbling
and diSimgenuous, as to preclude the pos
sibility Ct being unimtentional. He drops
hall of his quotation, giving the latter half
only, and AYERS that the important = If is
not attached to it, but that it occurs
twenty-seven pages further back, where,
on looking it up. we find he got the first
half Of his quotation, which he now pur-
poscly omits. SO his defence amounts TO
this We accused him Of perverting the
sense by emitting an important a IT, lie
denies that he omitted it from the last
half, but admits that he omitted it from
the first half Of his quotation, which he
now SURPRISES. Comment is unnecessary.
But let Us look at the honaefey OF the
above quotation i'll another light. In the
bred Scott decision, (Howard's Rep 4jl-2)
we fad the following:
Now, as we have already said in an
earlier part OF this opinion, upon differ
ent point, the right OF property in slave
Is distinctly and expressly affirmed in the
Constitution The right to traffic in it,
/ like IN ordinary article OF merchandise
and property, was guarantees 10 the c-ti-
IS,s - ; ~ 49, - f2,. t,.nt,: ynars
/ And the Government in express terms IS
| pledged to protect ii in all future time, il
the slave ESCAPES from MS owner
! Ana on page f-'-' same 4'e!.' we Hhu
the following:
Inc Only Ql DIVISIONS "A!Ch point 10 'he'l
,,.'e ANY,, i''r ,,al. !, Ia 5nt, ~ t%o
/ Government to protect it: no other power.
in relation TO this race, Is to be found in
n~nt Of special, delegated, powers, no au-
thoFlty beyond these TWO provisions can
De co'tsN'"uoiia'y exercised.
Now take these two quotations together,
unInutiIated. unuarred-no inportant is
IT,, 81 .l.o.. ,,,
/ consistent "I'h' ana mutually explain
each Other Any sim?'e'on can under
stand that they mean tA.s' ana TINS only !.
l. lN"' 'leEo are ohly TWO provision
IN the constitution 'hat-point 10 slaves
MAJ 'ii''7 are / NC P'o'.7ioLi9
"hich guarantee" 10 tiie citl@eAS OF the I.
= 'I'9 i'a,i' 70 ''''iI0 al SLAVES d oioiil''i!
ihefel'.il''ise' 'ot '"um'' Se''.s' Nio"s ago
e"'ife"} "i'" me pro. !Si'ii III ie'''
ehee 10 inc !l'','-'-'" OF '''5''''e saves
i-o'
= 60
-. -
/ II. -. .,.....,.,,,.... -. -,., Il
:.
~. 49,. o,,.I,a.;t,. 49,,