The Buchanan County guardian. (Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa) 1858-1864, 1860-09-18


have All the States free, when he know
that WASHINGTON looked forward ITO III,
time when we should have q contederac,
Of free Slates,' and that even SrEpnE.
A. DOUGLAS once expressed his desire
: and expectation of similar consumma
= ton. He knows that such was the ex
pectation and desire of the trainers o
j the Constitution. Mr., MADISON sal,
they desired no! to admit the word slav,
into the Constitution, in order that whe,
slavery had died out, future generation.
would not know from that insuumer
that the system had ever existed among
Us. Mr.. MASON of Virginia, in a speech
I in the Senate on the 25I of January last
states distinctly that our fathers con.
templated, and legislaled for, the ulLi-
mate extinction Of slavery. He says
Iaitempted at one time to show, by thereon.
dcd opinions OF Mr. Madison, that the famous
ordinance Of 1877, so far as K prohibited slave.
y
aimed at the African slave trade and aimed az
that alone; the idea being that ii they could re-
strict the area into which slaves could be in
reduced from abroad, they would, to that ex-
tent, prevent the importation of slaves and
that when it was altogether prevented the
condition Of slavery would die out of itself ;
but they were 10 Abolitonists.
To restrict the area into which slaves
could be introduced with view to the
total extinction Of tie system, Mr.. MA
son tells Us, was the object Of the Trainers
Of the ordinance Of 1857, and those con.
temporary with them-lhe trainers Of
the Constitution And lhis, he declares,
did not constitute them aboIilionists
How can Mr. BARRIER, starring out with
great prelensions oil fairness and candor,
charge Mr. LINCOLN and the Republican
party with aboltionism for trying to
copy the acts Of the Gathers-for trying
to restrict The area into which slavery
may be carried in order that the system
may ultimately come to an end. Mr.
Mason said that this did not constitute
the fathers abolitionists, why should I'll
make the Republican party an abolition
party
But Mr.. BARKER was severe upon Col.
WARREN for contending that the logical
result OF the decision in the bred Scott
case carries slavery into the States
This is no new argument. We all know
that Mr.. BUcHANAN and his friends hold
that the decision declares slaves TO be
property under the constiluli9n-thal,
slavery exists in the territories BY vir-
tue Of the Cons.itaGon-thal Kausasand
Nebraska are, through the operation Of
The Constitution just as much slave States
as South Carolina ana Georgia. And
Mr.. DoUoLAs, in lis Harper's Magazine
article, declares, with the Republicans,
chat II Mr. BucuAHAN is right IN luls IN
.erpretqlian Of the decision, The decision
also carries slavery into Pennsylvania
and tie other States. Mr. BARRIER may
pooh.po5h at Mr.. WARREy's assumption,
but he did not, and cannot, explain how.
il, as the Supreme Court says, the Const-
tuition Of tie United States protects slave
property, Stale action can override the
Constitutional provision.
Mr. BARRIER also undertook The task Of
showing that the supreme Court does
not decide the question Of territorial SOW
ereisnty over the question OF slavery.
In this Nj BAENLa is against almost cy-
cry representative Of the Democratic par
Y in the national Senate and House Of
Representatives. Some Of these men are
quite as good lawyers as Mr.. BAREEa,
and have as good an opportunity OIL
knowing what the Court did decide He
read an extract from REvEnDY JouNsoH's
letter to show that that point was not ar
gued before the Court. That may be,
but We think Judge fancy quite as good
authority as Dir. Johnson, as to what the
Court dcoi3sa Judge TAEEY wrote out
tie syllabus of that Decision, and il IS
found in the l9Jh volume D. Howard
Reports, a work whose authority Mr..
BARKER or no other lawyer will dispute.
Judge TASEY, in that syllabus, declares
that The Canrf aniaurr other tbinps de-