The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1860-06-06

cases. The question OF the right OF such
property to be held and to exist in Terri
tory is so firmly established that cannot
conceive any Territorial Legislature will; 50
far, consider itself warranted in usurping
the power Of expeling the slaves which the
Constitution has said, by Interpretation Of
the Federal court, to be sure, may be carried
and may be held there. That would require
only that we sheuld repeal that law. That
| would be perfectly willing to do.
l think therefore, sir, il there is no case
existing now, it will be still less likely "a
exist hereafter. All this debate, all this
earnest and jealous and heated controversy
is merely in prospect of an evil which is
only apprehended. None exists. When is
it likely to exist, and where With every
day trust the danger OF such a necessity is
diminished. Kansas will soon be taken
from the class Of territorial governments.
Where are we likely to have any such diff.
Guilty as that which these resolutions apprc
hend, Of an assault made by Territorial
Legislatures upon slavery within their Ter
ritories? Are there any slaves in Washing
ton? Will there be any question abou
slavery in Utahs In New Mexico? Why
sir. these are not regions to which you could
by invitation carry slavery. Well, where
is there to be Territory hereafter iormet
in which any controversy whatever about
slavery is likely to arise I? Kansas dispos-
ell of. does there remain any territory tn
which slavery If invited would gos know
Of none. | will not affirm that il is so ex-
actiy in regard to every purtinn Of our terri
terry ; but believe there is none of sufficient
importance to form State which would be
at all acceptable to the shareholders, il per-
mitted without the least hindrsnce 10 take
possession Of il. They can linda a more genial
climate. and a better soil on which to employ
this labor.
There is, then. not only no actual existing
evil, but there is no prospect of any. Why,
then, at such time, should the country be
agitated BY the prospect Of such distant
evil: Tie evil Of the day is enough; and {.
II seems to me, if this be 50. we are making
a present evil out Of an apprehension ot =
future one, and that future une never likely
to occur. Should we quarrel now, as a na-
tion, about remedies for evils that do not
exist: Shall we quarrel about remedies for
evils that not only do not exist, but which il
Is not probable ever will exist Is that
wisdoms When shall we be freed from
trouble. il this be the course Of policy
TO be pursued: Ii it IS said to be wise
to look tar ahead of Us to anticipate
evil, and by anticipating il. preventing it.
the question is, shall we anticipate the evil
for the purpose of making a quarrel over il
nova quarrel over future cause Of quar-
rel that We barely apprehcad, and which
may never occur: lwant the people Of the
United States To understand this thing. |
want the slayeanlder to know, that though
there may be shareholders and slaves In
Territories now existing. and territorial!
governments now existing, vet there has
occurred no necessity for the interposi'ion
Of this Government; that all, so far, has
gone on well and quietly enough under the
domestic Legislation Of the Territory.
Sir, when, in 1854, that great measure o!
the repeal Of the Missouri compromise was
adopted by the Congress of the United
States, one Of its promised benefits was, that
IL should remove from the Halls Of Congress,
and from all national controversy or discus
sion, the question uf slavery. That was
supposed to be one Of the benefits thar
would result. II was 70 transfer all thnse
questions To the Territories: make them
local instead of national questions: making
the disturbance local tn the rerriury, and
not national. to extend throughout d. limits
of the whole Republic. That was one ol
the promised benefits Of that measure; and
il il had tended even to accomplish that
object, much more IL il had accomplished II.
Il would have been great benefit 10 this
country. You framed the Kansas. Nebraska
bill with taat view. You gave Them large
powers Of self.goyernment. To b. sure
they were, AZ Of necessity they must be.
subject to this Government. liable IN be
changed or taken away az any time IL was
thought proper by this Government 10 do 50:
but still you did il with the very purpose uI
all these slavery questions 10
them. Sir. the act itself has MT produced
the promised consequences: but when we
look back to il, and when we interpret il,
we must know that was one of the purposes
and objects in view Oi the Legislators who
passed that bill.
The effect Of that law have been mortified,
10 be sure. by tie decision uf the Supreme
Court. do not know, | will mt interpret
L 70 say, that the law would have warranted
The Legislature Of Kansas in excluding
slavery altogether. if il had been in the
power Of Congress TO have granted sach a
power. Il was not known whether il was ia
the power Of Congress or not. The case Of
Dred Scott was then depending, and not
decided. TIE case of bred ScnttdCtcrnines
hat Congress had mt the power, and 81
course could not. by lie Kansas act, give IL.
The Kansas act could no, confer the rover
nr crpelling slavery. or excluding it. upon
he Legislature Of the Territory Of Kansas.
The power was limited then By that de-
sision. but for that decision, think II
would be difficult % deny that the Kansas.
Nebraska bill gave luil power 70 the
territorial government Oh the subject
= Power 10 regulate their own domestic in.
stitutions in their own way What broader
terms could he used Power 10 act on
III subjects Of rightal legislation" What
exception can you make to the generality Of
..a..aa. > Iha lva....f..t..... ..,I..a