Ashtabula weekly telegraph. [volume] (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1853-1873, 1861-01-05

Mexico in the omount Of territory acquired
Of Mexico, and give the right to take Slaves
there. He said il we wanted peace we must
allow the free territories TO remain free
we must have non-interferance in the terri.
tories.
Mr.. Benjamin said he did not desire tc
speak now because We should have the pro.
cical question before us 10 q few days The
issue would be plainly brought, whether we
intend to recognize the withdrawal of, or
make war on a state f4
Mr.. Brown said it seemed that Northern
Senators overlooked the main point at
issue. We claim that there is property
in slaves, and they deny it.
Until we can settle on some basis for this
question, it is idle to talk of peace He
| claimed that the doctrine Of non recognition
of property in slaves was new doctrine.
He said the South had $4,000, 900. in this
kind of property. is it to be supposed that
the South would consent 70 live under a
government outawing this kind Of property.
Can millions at the South consent to live
under as outlaws-ouly recognized when
the government wants tribute. III bad no
hope of changing the judgement of Sena-
tors, but there were some stubborn facts
which might well come to the knowledge of
their constituents. He referred to the
treaty of Independence, as speaking of ne
groes as property. If gentlemen were will
ing to go back aud live under that treaty
there would be peace.
He referred to the treaty of 1912, as re-
cognizing the same property signed BY
John Adams and j Q. Adams Were
gentleman wiser than those statesmen p
BE read from book published in Boston
years ago, and contended that the people
then recognized the rights of property.
| Are men wiser now than our Fathers But
| if the Government continued to outlaw the
South, there is only two ways-separate by
peace or by force. He said the south
would not take less than justice, nor asked
more. They recognized the right of the
government to protect the property of the
North, but the North would not recognize
the right Of projection to the property of
the South
If they persisted in the idea that the gov.
eminent would not recognize property in
slaves and protect it, then, standing 10 the
high presence and before Almighty God,
he declared the Union could not last ninety
days. He then the asked the statue of
! New Mexico, which was intended by bis
amendment to extend over the territory of
Arizona, be printed in the report, 80
that the people might see what he
meant.
Mr.. Green said bis object was TO organize
n government for Arizona and he hoped
these discussions ofpolitical matters would
be postponed. He did not think the
amendment of the Senator from Mississippi
practically amounted to anything under
present circumstances. He would vote for
it. He quoted the law allowing slaves to
be sold for government claim, as recogniz
ing the right of property. but if this idea
were intended to be forced upon US, of non
recognition of property, we had better go
home, adjourn Congress, not dissolve the
Government He compared the Senators
for this idea of equality, to the fable OF the
strok and fox. The fox invited the stork
to dine, but had soup in shallow dishes and
so the stork could not get any. The next
day the stork invited the fox TO dine, and
had food in long necked jars. He told the
fox there was perfect equality, and to help
himself In fact the fox could not get any
thing He denied the right of notification,
but claimed the right of secession and ar
gued against the coercion of State He
argued against the amendment of the Sena-
tor from Illinois, Mr. Trumbnll.
Mr. Doolittle said the senator from
Missouri assumed that the Constitution re-
pealed the laws of Mexico. in this Territory,
and took slavery there. This was contra
ry to the decisions Of the Supreme Court
He claimed that the doctries of Mr. Calhoun
that the Constitution recognized slave
property, found few supporters at the time
Of its announcement.
Mr.. Mason said Mr. Calhoun was dead
but he did not understand him to say even
that the Constitution establishes slavery,
but claimed that slaves we're property, and
therefore by the Constitution must be pro.
tected.