Western Reserve chronicle. [volume] (Warren, Ohio) 1855-1921, 1860-05-16

i the slaves. 1nlS ScSbAOh ho0 SA N
akable restriction to the introduction OF
lavery into that Territory. 1t had res
,ect to existing relations, and did not IN
erfere with citizens in the Territory bona
fds owning slaves, and citizens removing
herein bona fde owning slaves. Inc
.reaty stipulations with France compelled
Congress to respect the right of property
If the citizens of the Territory; and as
slaves existed there by the laws OF
France, to that extent slavery was permit
ted there by Congress, and in other res
poets it was discouraged. Congress could
not prior to the year 1908, prohibit the
migration or importation of such persons
as any of the States, existing at the time
of the adoption of the Constitution, should
think proper to admit; but by a reference
to the acts above stated, it will be seen
that it prohibited the traffic in slaves for
eigp and domestic, wherever it cOnstitu-
tionally could, thus stigmatizing slavery as
an evil to be discouraged and prohibited.
On the ID day of March, 1907, Congress
passed the act to prohibit the foreign slave
trade as to all the States, after the year
1903, the FIRST moment they could so pro-
hibit it. April 20, 1918, Congress amen
ded this law, making its provisions more
effectual; and in 1919 more stringent
law was passed On the 9Th of March.
1920, the last act on the subject of the
slave trade was passed, making it piracy
and Furnishing a conviction of being en-
paged in it with death. These acts, sew
orally and jointly, show that the early
fathers of the Republic regarded slavery as
an evil and crime and acting upon that
conviction, they were eager to punish it as
a crime, where they supposed they had a
right to do so.
i The advocates of slavery are not salts
fed with the opinions and practices of the
fathers; and the gentleman from Alabama
(MR. CURRY adopts the saying, that 1t
is necessary for each generation to discuss
anew the great problems Ofhuman specula-
ton, which continually come back after
certain Intervals for re-examination. Sup
pose we accept this philosophy, and meet
the question on its merits, untrammeled by
the opinions and teachings of the fathers
r if they were wrong in opinion or action
f We are not bound to follow them. They
| were honest men, but they may have mad,
: mistakes. From our standpoint it woulC
l seem to me that it would have been bette
/ to have provided in the Constitution for tn
f gradual abolition of slavery in all tn
: States; and 1 think, had the trainers of tn
t Constitution foreseen what we now see
: they would have done so. The words o
e Pitt, on the East India bill, quoted ap
= provngly by the gentleman from Alabama,
: we're wise: Good principles might sleep
= but bad ones never. 1t Is the curse Of 80
h ciety, that when bad principle is once es
d tablished, bad men will always be found t
= give it its full effect The spread and in
: crease eff slavery in this country, agains
: the wish and against the expectation of tn
t early fathers of the Republic, verify tn
b truth of the remark.
' Now, Mr.. Chairman, to the question
were our fathers wrong has the sentimen
e of Christendom been wrong. and is the Re
o publican party wrong, in regarding SLAYER,
o as an evil to be deplOred and crime to b
d prohibited? l cannot take time to dehn
y slavery, except that it reduces persons
n chattcls to all intents, purposes, and cor
Q structions whatever; ignores their rights
L family, wife, or children, except for the II
n terest of others, and does not recognize tn
IT marriage relation among slaves. There al
no laws in slave States regulating or lega
e izing such relation among slaves. undel
= stood the gentleman from Kentucky [ AlT
t SIMMsl to say. in the debate on the pOlyt
n amy bill, he did not admit the legality
+ any such relation among the the colOre
II people. This is, necessarily. the law
, chattel slavery; for the legalizatiOn of th'
L relation interferes with the property cha
acter of slaves, obstructs their unlimite
Of transfer and sale. and comedies to the slaV
is rights in consistent with the rights Of Il
c. master. Now, to undertake to prove th'
T, such an entire disregard. upon any pretex
i of the rights of any class in society Is wron
IN is like urging that two and two are fOu
= or undertaking to demonstrate a self-ev
id kent proposition. l understood the gentl
Of man from Mississippi Mr.. LAMAR to a.
nit, in his learned argument in defense
D slavery, that the enslayement Of the Angl
ne Saxon race would be wrong, for they We
Ia entitled to freedom because they we're cap
ID bic of governing themselves, but, at Il
te same time, he asserted that the enslaYemel
of of the African race was right, because thu
IN were incapable of governing themselves;
to other words, being an inferior race, t
b. superior race were justified in making slav
" of them. 1t is not within the range
he what I propose to say to reply to this
Y, abOlism. Ny friend, Mr. LovEJOr, ma
of some remarks upon that which are WORT
III of consideration. But 1 would like to a
y, the learned gentleman question upon
he governmental philosophy. 1t is an adm
b. ted fact that there is in the slave States