The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1860-05-30

| inconsistency, which, with unparalleled az
frontcry, has been peraded by Douglas in his
Senatorial harangue,
Mississippi has always stood firmly by the
doctrine which was proclaimed in her behalf
! by her delegates at Charleston.
! If she has at times, in her public assem-
blages, not made proclamation of her unial-
tering adherence to this principle, it is because
no necessity for such proclamation existed
1t was a great, ADMITTED FACT, which has of
late years been denied by Douglas, because its
denial is the inevitable result of his dogma,
| that the settlers in the territories have a
right, before being authorized to form their
| Constitution preparatory to admission as a
State, to pass laws confiseating or driving off
the property Of Southern citizens.
On the 18th of January 1850 the then Gov
ernOr of Mississippi, Hon, J. W. Matthews,
representing the sentiments ofan overwhclrnn-
/ ing majority Of the people, as declared at the
| ballot-hoX, communicated his annual message
| to the Legislature, in which he discussed the
! sectional controversy in Hits asPects-review-
| ing the agyressioHs of the anti-savery power,
and declaring what the Federal Government
| was restricted by the Constitution from doing
| in the control of the territories and what du-
ties it was required to perform. The doctrine
! Of 'non-interyention'' was then distinctly ex-
/ planned by the Democratic Governor of Mis-
sissippi to mean that Congress could neither
constitutionals prohibit nor establish slave
property in the Territory, but that it "ias he
oolre and IS bo7aad 70 protect it. Said the Gov
ernor "The oJ2igat!oo To protect IS teio!{g IT,
recoaciiea5fe 'etth the erercise # lo,rsr r. de-
| stroy prPrqpertg."
1t the author Of this patriotic sentiment
had been endowed with the gift Of Proplesy.
he could not have more clearly f1reseeu and
completely met and overthrown the issues
now presented by the Sluatter Sovereignty
| or abolitionized Democracy who are following
the lead of Douglas he could not have more
clearly stated the position which was assumed
by the representatives of Mississippi at Char
laston, guided, as they Were, by the path
which had been marked out by the Democra-
cy themselves by whose authority they acted.
But let the reader give his attention to the
subjoined extract from the Message of Gov
ernor Matthews. delivered to the Legislature
of Mississippi, more then ten years age, and
make up his own judgment
The Federal Government is not sovereign
ty but the common agent OF confederacY Of
sovereignties and the constitutional compact
between these contains the grants and limita-
tons Of its authority. The correctness of
this position will not be denied. 1t fol-
lows that Congress can exercise no powers but
such as are expressly granted in the constitu-
ton, or such as are essential, as incidents, to
the carrying INTO effect expressed grants
Does the constitution anywhere grant to Con-
gress the power to interfere with. or destroy
the private rights to property, in slaves. or in
anything else which a citizen Of the United
States may lawfully possess The exercise
of such power is not only without authority,
but it is foreign to. and opposed to the purposes
for which the Federal Government was crea-
ted 1t was Lot forme to destroy the rights
of the people as recognized by the municipal
laws Of their respective States, but its province
is to attend to the general interests of all the
States, and ito provide for the comHaoR defence
and the general welfare of the United States"
Do the words common defeHce,'' mean the pro-
tection Of our lives, only, and not OF our pro-
perty also ? viii it be contended, that while
Congress IS bound TO protect the citizen, it is
at liberty to destroy his property, or his rigM
to hold and ENJOY 10 ? Does not the obligation
to provide for the common defence extend
| to the property of our citizens, as will as to
| their persons ? The answer to these ques.
tons must be in the affirmative. Congress.
Therefore, has po,cef, and IS bolifd to protect,
but has no power to destroy property, or the
rights to property. The Obligation 20 protect
is wholly irreconcilable with the exercise ola
power to destroy our property.
But to what extent does this Obligation to |
defend, or protect the rights of the United |
States, or the people thereof? Doubtless, to |
al cases beyond tie jurisdiction Of the maaaici
pal pOrer o, authority Of tie respective States,
and aFheferer orr citizens or their property, may
riglJaayge They may righfjaly go with !
their property on the high seas, for this is the |
common right of the people of oil nations, and
they may yggttfullg go to the territories of the /
United States, for the territories are the COM
mon property # all The States.
10 the views thus clearly and forcibly pre-
scented by Governor Matthews, on the 7th
of January 1850, not dissenting voice
throuShoutall the confines of the State
neither from Democrat nor from Wing
heard
Again On Monday October LIST 1919, the
people of Mississippi, without respect par
ty, held meeting in the city Of jackson, to
consider tt relations of the noa-slayeholding
and slaveholding States, with regard to the
territories mutually owned by them; and to
consider generally the aggressive policy of the
North.
The partlclpants in this meeting were such
prominent Wings as William L. Sharkey,
ID. w. Adams, the late John l. Guion the
late George Winchester, the late G. G. Skip
with and Others living and departed, well
known to fame. The Democracy were re-
by suchsterling men as Joseph W.
Matthews, A. M.elayton, James Whitfield,
John M. Sharp, The late E. c. Wilkinson, the
late Thos. II. Williams and many others.
Over this meeting, Hon. W. L. Sharkey
presided. His address on taking the Chair
was marked by precision ofthought, a luci-
dity of reasoning, iorce of logic, and an Or
thodoxy of sentiment, which commended it to
the warm approval ofall parties His defence
Of the rights of the South: his exposure of !
the aggressions of theNorth aud his reason
ngs as to the duty of the slaveholding States,
were conclusive and ,Inanswerable. We wish
we could now publish the acl.ole of this address.
We intend to do so during the pending can F.:
'ass. Our present purpose, however, is with I
out single point-the pol0er and he dmyof
Congress to protect tie PERSONS and property Of t
Is citizens IN tie territories The eloquent
speaker Judge Sharkey) was warmly APP |
'lauded by his whole audience when he gave .
ltterance to this doctrines. +
We ask not the interference Of the North i
o correct our morals OF our institutions. We S
10 not intrude upon them, but only demand !,
0 be permitted to an equality in the enjoy
nent OF our common property. Congress, it I
) true, may establish a Government in the i
eTTitory, but that government must be foun- g
ed in equality. II must pfetect tle propsrtg !
T the common osCner, as loeH as his person.
Whether this power is derived under the
bird section of the fourth article ofthe conSti-