Funding for the digitization of this title was provided by R.J. Taylor, Jr. Foundation.
About Daily chronicle & sentinel. (Augusta, Ga.) 1837-1876 | View Entire Issue (Aug. 17, 1848)
HVJ.W. .V XV. S. JONES AUGUSTA, GA., THURSDAY MORNING, AUGUST 17, 1848 VOL,XII--NO.' ii>4 Serins, &c, TH CHRONICLE & SENTINE] IS PUBLISHED DAILY, TRI-WEEKLY So WEEKLY BY J. W. & W. S JONES. TERMS: DAILA PAPER.— 'Fen Dollars per annum, pays ble in advance. TRI " EEKLN PAPER. Five Dollars peran mm in advance. • \NbEKL\ PAPER. (A mammoth sheet) Tic Dollars per annum, in advance. TERMS OF ADVERTISING. IN DAILY PAPER, Fifty Cents per square (twelve lines or less) for the first insertion : Thirty eight Cents for the next five; and Twenty-five Centi for each subsequent insertion ; WEEKLY, Seventy fire Cents; SEMI-MONTHLY or MONTHLY, (in either paper) One Dollar; and Rule and Figure Work, One Dollar, fjf* If next to reading mattei and leaded, charged as a n6w advertisement each insertion. Professional or Bus ’ Cards , not exceeding six lines, Ten Dollars pe. annum. If over six lines pro rata per line. Ujf* Communications designed to promote private or individual interests, will be charged as advertise ments. -jp No gratuitous Advertising, under any circum stances, except Marriage and Obituary Notices; and these, when over six lines, will be charged as Adver tisements. 6 TAN DING ADVERTISEMENTS. 1 square, (12 lines,) 1 month, without alteration $6 1 “ “ 3 months, “ “ 12 I “ “ 6 months, altered quarterly. 18 1 “ “ 12 months, “ “ '25 2 squares, one-half more than the above rates. 3 “ three-fourths more than the above rates. 4 “ double the above rates. O* If next to reading matter and leaded, double these rates. Advertisements not marked the number of in sertions will be continued and charged by the inser tion. With Druggists contracts will be made by the year on reasonable terms, as heretofore. When the bill of any house or firm amounts within six months to SSO or upwards, for other than perma nent advertisements, a discount of 25 per cent, will he made, if paid on presentation. Burliness Cavils. To Professional & Business Men. PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS CARDS, not exceeding six lines, will be inserted under this head at iLit rate of §lO per annum. Cards exceeding six lines, will he charged prorata per line. lUarcl)ouse aiVD Commission. L has. P. M’Calla. | Gustave Romain. McCALLA do ROMAIN. COMMISSION MERC34N TS n 6 APALACHICOLA FLORIDA. ly H. L. Jeffers. J W, S, Cothran. JEFFERS &, COTHRAN, FACTORS AND COMMISSION MER CHANTS. AUGUSTA, Ga., amt HAMBURG, So. Ca. jy2B W. H. C. MILLS, FACTOR So COMMISSION MERCHANT, Continues business at Ins old viand, Xo. 176 Bay-street, Savannah, Georgia. REFERENCES: Messrs. D' Antignac q- Evans , Augusta. “ Charles Day Co., Alaeon. “ E. Padlcford <£• Co., Savannah ol iUciiiccil Profession. N. M. SNEED, DENTIST. OFFICE AT WASHINGTON, GEORGIA. located as above, tenders his services in the various branches of his profession, to the citizens of Wilkes and the counties adjacent. The latter he will visit occasionally, as his services may be requir ed. o!8-w MEDICAL CARD DRS. H. F . So R . CAMPBELL, AUGUSTA, GEORGIA, O* Jointly tender their professional services to the citizens of Augusta and its vicinity. Jj* Office at the dwelling of Henry Camfbkll, where calls will atall times meet punctual atten tion Drugs, illercljanfiisc, &c. HAVILAND, RISLEY So CO., DEALERS IN CHOICE DRUGS MEDICINES. &C., &C. NEAR THE MANSION HOUSE, GLOBE AND U. S. HOTELS, AUGUSTA. myß-ly iron Jxumiines. NEESON & TIIiKEY, eagle iron & brass foundry AUGUSTA, GA. Immediately above the lot of the old Plantcis Hotel. Gearing for Factories, Mills, Gins, &n., and "ther castings, made to order. Also Patterns ol every description. All work warranted. Orders from the country will receive prompt attention. ap22 Hotchkiss’ Water-wheels on hand and to order, 3Utormcs anb Solicitors. WILLIAM BELL, attorney at law, Crawford ville Georgia. practice in the counties of Taliaferro Warren, Hancock, Greene, Oglethorpe, and Wilkes. mhlO-w W. MILO OLIN, attorney at law, AUGUSTA, GEORGIA, Has removed his office to the Pity Hall. d 5 G. PUTNAM, attorney at law, 1\V arreuton, Georgia. as-13- ly JOSEPH C. WILKINS, Attorney at law, A ill practice in all the counties of the Eastern n Circuit. ■ IN RICEBORO, LIBERTY COUNTY, I Georgia. sll-tf 1 ROBERT E. WOODING, j Attorney at law, I Appling, Georgia. f2B-wly J JOS. HENRY LUMPKIN, Jr., I Attorney at law, J LEXINGTON. ...GA. er loE. D. Robertson, Augusta, Ga. Hon. A. B. Lonostreet, Oxford, Ga. -J^ n ‘ ** OHN H. Lumpkin, Rome, Ga. jal' E. C. SHACKELFORD, ATTORNEY at law, H r LEXINGTON, GA. , f u:c ' Won. A. H.Stephens. CrawTordville ap2;j-«ly Uuilg Cljroittcie & Sentinel. _: Business tHarDs. Jno. L. Kirkpatrick. ] Walter L. Warkf.j L KIRKPATRICK So WARREN, attornies at law, n & WILL practice in all the Courts of the Mid die Circuit. Office on Mclutosh-street, opposite th Constitutionalist range, Augusta, Georgia. fel-T JOHN LYON, a ' ATTORNEY AT LAW, n, j (Os the late firm of Richard P. &J. Lyon, Albany, will practice in the counties of Paulding, Cass, Chcm :o j Forsyth, Lumpkin, Union, Gilmer, Murray ; AV alker, Dade, Chattooga and Floyd. J O’ Office in SPRING PLACE, Murray county | Georgia, Refers to Gov. Chaa. J. McDonald, Marietta ; Col, j, R. K. Hines, of Macon ; Hon. Lott Warren, Messrs. Hora & McGuire, Hunt & Pynchen, Albany, Ga. s Messrs. A. J. «T. W. Miller, Augusta. 529-ts tl EDWARD H. POTTLE, e ATTORNEY AT LAW r WARRRNTON ... GEORGIA. h References —Messrs. A. J. T. W. Miller, Augusta Ga.; Hon. T. B. King, Glynn county, Ga. ja!2-t rr ■ —— Linton Stephens, ! J. L, Hied. STEPHENS & HUD, B ATTORNIES AT LAW CRAWFORDVILLE, GA. 3£jf*Will practice in all the Comities of the North ‘ etn circuit. ivl6-lv* 1 ~Z. * •JOHN Re STANFORD, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Clarkcsville • • Ga. I O’ Will practice in the counties of Clarke, Prank j lin, Habersham, Lumpkin, Forsyth, Gilmer, Union Murray and Gwinnett, and in the Federal Circui 1 Court for Georgia. 170 JONES So SHEWMAKE, ATTORNIES AT LAW, WAYNESBORO, GA. O' JOSEPH B. JONES and JOHN T. SHEW MAKE, having associated themselves in the practice of Law, will promptly attend to any business entrust ed to them in the counties of Burke, Jefferson, Eman uel, Richmond, Scriven and Washington. jy9 L. C. SIMPSON, ATTORNEY AT LAW ATLANTA... GEORGIA. HIT ill promptly attend to all business entrusted o his care. f 29-1 y S. W. HORTON, ATTORNEY AT LAW, KLBFRTON, GEORGIA. fjr’ Practices in the Courts of Elbert, Franklin, Jackson and Madison Counties. mh2o-ly FELIX C. MOORE, ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW, Crawfordvillc- • • • Georgia* Will practice in all tiiccouuliesof the North ern, and Greene county of the Ocmulgce, Circuit. Office in the Court-House. f24-ly Tiios, M. Berrien. j Jas. M. Pepper. BERRIEN So PEPPER, ATTORNIES AT LAW, Or Will continue to practice in the Middle Circuit of Georgia. Their olfice is in WAYNESBORO, j BURKE COUNTY, wlmro «—urem win atall ,i„Tr. ...• mono. inv2m- w est PAPER /0 TWO DOLLARS &. \ A\ >Pf PER ANNUM, IN ADVANCE fy / v .. — lUccktn (Eljvcmule anb Sentinel, A WHIG JOURNAL, | Printed on a Mammoth Sheet, 23 by 16 Inches! Containing 36 Columns of Mailer I ! Is PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY MORNING, by J. W. & W. S. Jones, at Augusta, Ga. at Two Dol lars per annum, in advance. Tihis t aper is printed on a lame and handsome sheet, on new and beautiful clear type, in a style canal to any paper in the Union, and contains MORE THAN DOUBLE tlie quantity of readiup matter of the ordinary weekly papers ot the Smith No paper in this or the adjoining States furnishes so fu ll and ropiou- a synopsis of the current foreign, domestic, political and general news of the week —embracing every thing of interest to the planter or business man—while lull and comp ete weekly reports will be given not only of the Augusta market, hut those of the cities of Charleston, Sa vannah, New Orleans, Mobile, New York, and oilier cotton marts. TO SMALL CLUBS. Six Copies fur Ten Dollars'! /—Any person who will pro cure ns FIVE Subscribers, and enclose us TEN DOLLARS, shall have the paper sent to them one year gratis. ftjT" Specimen copies may be procured at the office, or we will take pleasure in forwarding them to any direction desired. Direct all letters to J. W. & W. S JONES. Augusta, (la. TO THE TRAVELLING PUBLIC. New Packet Line to Savannah. -lyQßn* j THE Light Draught Steamer IV AN HOE, Capt. German, hav ng undergone thorough repairs and being fitted up expressly for passengers; has coin inenccd her trips between Augusta and Savannah, and will leave Augusta regularly on SATURDAY’S, at 6 o’clock, A. M. For Freight or Passage apply to the Captain, on board, or to „17 JEFFERS & COTHRAN. TO THE TRAVELLING PUBLIC. New Packet Line to savannah. THE Steamer H. L. COOK, Capt. Ihly, having undergone a JSBHHBBB*,borough repair, and having been ; fitted up expressly for passengers, with roomy cabins and large promenade decks, and being ol light draft, has commenced her trips between Augusta and Sa vannah, and will leave Augusta regularly ou TUES DAYS, at 7A. M. For Freight or Passage (having berths for the accommodation oflhirty-five passengers) apply to JEFFERS & COTHRAN, Augusta. > n 17 - • AUGUSTA FOUNDRY, ' MILLWRIGHT & MACHINE SHOP. NEAR THE GEORGIA R. ROAD DEPOT. The subscribers having purchased of THOS. HOPKINS, Esq., the above establish ment, intend carrying on the business in its various branches. They will furnish IRON AND BRASS CASTINGS, of every description at short not ice, and on as rcason f able termsasany similar establishment at the South. They hope by strict attention to business to merit the patronage heretofore extended to the establishment. Having a number of ENGINE LATHES, we are prepared to cut LARGFi SCREWS of any dimen !J sions MILL SPINDLES, &c., alwayson hand and made to order. TALIAFERRO & TORBET. » c. C. Taliaferro, > d! R. Torbet. $ ... jj PATTERNS of every description made to order We will keep on hand and make to order, HOTCHKISS’ WHEELS, to suit the various heads 7 of water. T ‘ &T - FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE rWIHE PROTECTION INSURANCE I COMPANY, of Hartford, Connecticut, havs established an Agency in Augusta, and propose _ aking fire and river risks upon property of al 1 doscrip, 3 tions, onas reasonable terms as any other good office, Office at me store of Force, Brother s Co U_ lamp wicks, SOLAR, ARGAND, LARD and CAM PHINE LAMP WICKS, always onhmi, am 1 for sale by a P 24 WM HAINES J SPEECH OF MR. STEPHENS N . OF GEORGIA, ON THE PROPOSED ‘ COMPROMISI BILL ’ &C. House of Representatives.. August 7, 1848 I he House having under consideration tin 1 two messages of the President in relation tc peace with Mexico and the organization ol Territorial Governments for New Mexico ami California— 'l JJ r - Stephens obtained the lloor and said : Mr. Speaker : The messages of the Presi ’ c, £ nt novv "Oder consideration embrace objects of grave and momentous interest, involving the peace, the happiness, the prosperity and honor !. wejl as Perhaps the safety of the republic.— 1 here are many topics alluded to, in these mes sages, which require the calm and dispassionate consideration of this House, and also the ma ture and deliberate consideration of the people of this country. So faras this House is con- I cerned, I do not believe that the proper consi deration can be given to them at this session. 1 Ihe time is short, even if the prevailin'* tem -1 per here was not unsmted, as it is, from the . excitement of a Presidential canvass, to enter upon the investigation with that freedom from passion and coolness of judgment so essential 1 for wise and prudent action. I intend, there fore, before taking my seat to move that the further consideration of these messages he postponed for the present, and that they be laid on the table, to come up at the next ses sion of Congress. Before making that motion however. I wish to submit some views upon one of the subjects embraced in them. I wish I had time to speak of all of them, particularly the President’s attempted justification for the exercise of those extraordinary powers which he claims as his legitimate right, as a conquer or un ler the laws of nations, but one hour will not allow this. And 1 intend, at this time, to confine myself to one top : c only, which is the organization ofierntoria JgovcrnmcnisinNcw Mexico and California. [Here Mr. Inge, of Alabama, interrupted, and said that, from the informaiion of the gen tleman, he supposed he was going to discuss the slave question; and if so, he hoped he would not close his speech by moving to lay the subject oa the table, but would allow the opportunity for a reply.] Mr Stephens continued by saying, it is not my object, Mr. Speaker, to prevent a reply.— My intention was orly to save time. If the gentleman from Alabama, orany other gentle man, wishes to continue this discussion, I, in dividually, have no objection, and so far as the argument 1 shall submit is concerned, I shall certainly interpose no obstacle In any reply that any gentleman may desire to make. I therefore now notify the gentleman that I shall not make the motion just intimated. Ibe President, Mr. Speaker, in bis reply to the resolutions of inquiry which passed this House some days ago, calling for information touching the character ami form of government in these lute conquests, seems to have miscon ceived the object and scope of those resolutions, and in his message refers only to those govern ments which were established by his own or der, and which he says necessarily ceased at un: in uiifiTiiiuii i;i me tr rt i . jtuvv, , jeel was not only to inquire in.o tliat subject,hut also to be informed of the nature and charac ter of the governments which would necessari ly exist there upon the displacement or disso lution of those which were temporarily, ille gally, and unconstitutionally, in my opinion, set up by himself. Before we can legislate properly for any people, and particularly the people of a conquered province, we must know something of the nature, character, and form of their government, and something of the laws in the country at the time of the con quest. The object and intention ofmy resolutions was to get some information upon this point, as well as others. But upon this the answer to \ the call of the House is silent, and the absence of this information constitutes of itself a very good reason for opposition to any legislation t»y Congress over these Territories until it can he obtained. But, sir. I have much graver rea sons than this for my opposition to the Terri torial bill which was rejected the other day in this House, on my motion. It is my object al this time to speak upon that measure, which some gentlemen are pleased to call the “com promise hill,” but which might he more pro perly entitled Articles of Capitulation on the part of the South, and a surrender ol the just rights of her people loan equal participation in the new acquisitions of territory. The sur render was covert, but it was no less complete and absolute. This I intend to show. Never was any mea sure more grossly misnamed or miscalled. Ii was no compromise in any sense of the word. A compromise is n mutual yielding of rights, for ho purpose of adjusting and settling dill’er eucos and difficulties. But, in this case, there was no such mutual concession. The whole question was to he left, in the last re sort.to the Supreme Court of the United States, upon whose decision one party was either to get all or lose all. And entertaining not the slightest doubt that under it the South was to lose all, 1 adopted the speediest and most ef fectual means of defeating it. A gentleman from Virginia, the other day (Mr. Bayly,) intimated that the bill was laid upon the table for party effect and for party purposes : and be seemed to express deep re gret al the defeat of the measure. Sir, so far us the action of this House was concerned, I can answer for nobody but myself. I under take to answer for no party, no partisan, and no other man. I know not by what motives,oth ers were actuated ; perhaps the motives were as different and as numerous as the members themselves. But, so far as I was concerned, I can tell the gentleman from Virginia and the couiury, that I was governed by my own de liberate judgment upon the real character of the measure ; and I trust 1 shall be able to show r him and the country that I understood what I wasdoing when I met that bill with firm resist ! ance at the very threshold of your action. It was in my opinion just such a measure as no man in this House from any quarter ought to have voted for, and particularly no man from ; the South. And this, sir,l affirm in the first place.be , cause, while it was urged as a compromise and ! a settlement of the agitating question which I now so greatly distracts the public mind, it real ly settled nothing, but opened wide the door for greater and more alarming excitement. — Those gentlemen of the North who advocated > it, claimed it as a complete triumph of their ’ principles ; while those of the South, I sup s pose, were prepared to go to their constituents and tell them ibatit fully secured all their rights. ] Now, sir, Ido not believe in compromises or , settlements that are not fully, clearly and dis tinctlv understood on both sides al the time, e What is the point of difference novv between • the two great sections of the Union? The '• North insists upon the policy of excluding the institutions of the South from the whole of the new Territories, while the South contends that she is, in justice, entitled to an equal share of j whatever country may be acquired by the common blood and treasure of all. And bow i was this difference proposed to lie cornpro h mised and settled ? Simply by the adoption of a measure, upon the meaning and import of B which leading men on both sides, at the time, diflered as widely as they did upon the main question itself. So far from settling the S- question, or "pouringoil upon the troubled waters,”such a measure could but have multi plied difficulties, increased excitement, and x- ” added fuel to the flame.” For this reason, in ’j my judgment,the hill should meet favor from no quarter. The real question, the great issue between the two sections of the country, has to be met sooner or later, and no shifting of r«- ' s sponsibility, in order to get a postponement for g the purpose of carrying a Presidential election, r ° r relieving a candidate from an almost univer sally condemned position, will successfully evade it. And when it is met, I want it met fairly and squarely. But, in the second place, Mr. Speaker, it is , ni y object to show that, for far greater and more controlling reasons, no Southern man should have voted for that measure. I do not often make sectional appeals upon this floor—never, unless to repel attacks, or to maintain what I . believe to lie right and just. In this instance I . feel bound to do so, no less in obedience to my own inclination than from a sense of duty to those whose honor and interests have been confided to my charge. And that duty I shall this day discharge, faithfully and fearlessly, let the consequences be what they may. That hill, I repeat, proposed a total abandonment and surrender of the rights of the South. Not ar. open abandonment, but a covert one. Ido not mean to say that those gentlemen who fa vored it, and who regret that it did not pass, so considered it. But such would have been, nevertheless, its effect. And I will invite the close attention of those gentlemen who differ from me upon this subject to the views I shall present and the positions 1 shall assume; fori not only challenge, but 1 defy a refutation of them. To be understood more clearly, I will read the terms ol the hill itself, so fir as it rebates to slavery in New Mexico and California. It will be seen that all legislation by the Terri torial Governments “respecting the prohibition or establishment of African slavery” was to he prohibited ; and all questions relating to titles to slaves there, or their right to freedom, was to be left ultimately to the decision of the Su premo Court of the United States. Here arc the words of the hill : “Sec. 26. And be it further enacted, Thai the legislative power of said Territory shall, until Con gress shall otherwise provide, ho vested in ihc gov ernor, secretary, and judges of the supreme court, who, ora majority of them, shall have power to pass any law for the administration of justice in said Ter ritory which shall not he repugnant to this net, or inconsistent with the laws and constitution of 'he United States. Hut no law shall he passed interfer ing with the primary disposal ol the soil, respecting an establishment of religion, or respecting the pro hibition or establishment ot African slavery; amino tax shall he imposed upon the property of the United States; nor shall the lands or oilier properly of non residents he taxed higher than the lands or other Property of residents. All the laws shall he sub mitted to the Congress of the United States, and, if disapproved, shall he null and void.” And in the 31st section, after providing for lowing provision Is found : “W ritsof error and appeals from the final deeds- | ions o( said Supreme Court shall be allowed, and may he taken to the Supreme Court of the United Stales, m the same manner and under the same regulations fia from the Circuit Courts of the United States; ex cept only that in all cases involving title loslarcsthe said writs of error or appeals shall be allowed and decided by the said Supreme Court, without regard to the value of the matter, property, or title in contro versy ; and except also that a writ of error or appeal shall he allowed to the Supreme Court of the United Slates from the decision of the supreme court created by this act, or ol any judges thereof, or of the district courts created by this act, or of any judges thereof, i iqion any writ ot habeas corpus, involving the ques ■ | tion of personal freedom.” The hill contains nothing else which hears materially upon the subject of slavery. It merely prohibits the Territorial Government from passing any law upon tiie subject; and leaves the Southern man, who may he inclined to go there with his slaves, to contest his rights j to tin! best of his abilities with the courts ol the Territory iti the first instance, and then, if lie chooses, with the Supreme Court of the Union, All that tlie bill does is to guard against the passage of any law for the protection of the master; but opens wide the door of expensive and almost endless litigation between him and bis slave, without affording him even the shadow of a semblance of u hope that his rights, althe end of the law, will ever bo re cognized or enforced. The most interesting of all questions, Mr. Speaker, to the South, upon this point, is, by what law will the Territorial courts, in the first instance, and the Supreme Court of the United States, in the last resort, decide the question of freedom between the master and slave ? It is not the province of courts, in their judicial character, to make laws ; they can only decide upon laws after they are made,. And. in the absence of legislation by Congress, and the Territorial Governments, upon this subject, by what law, I ask, will the courts decide ques tions between the master and his slave in these Territories? This, sir, is a great and vital question for us to consider—not as partisans, but as statesmen and as legislators—before we refer a subject of so much interest to theirde cision. It is certainly a matter of the utmost importance to the people of the South that they should not be left in ignorance upon it. And, so far as my ability goes, they shall not he. I set out, then, by stating that, according to the best, ablest, and most approved writers on public law, and according to the decisions of the courts in England in analogous cases, and according to the repeated decisions of our own Supreme Court, to which this bill proposed to refer this matter, (in the absence of such legis lation as I have referred to,) the law by which the courts would decide questions of slavery there, is the law which was in force in New Mexico and California upon that subject at the time of the conquest. The general principles, which I understand to be recognized and well settled among civilized nations in modern times, in relation to conquest, are, that all the laws which were iu force in the conquered country at the lime of the conquest, are held to continue in force until altered or modified by the conquering power, except such as may he inconsistent wath the fundamental law ol the conquering power, or inconsistent with some stipulation in the final treaty, or such as were purely political in their character, and con ! cerned only the relations het\vcen the people and their former sovereign or ruling power. This I state as a proposition which no man can controvert. In barbarous times, when a peo ple were conquered, they might, by the laws i of war, he put to the sword, or he reduced to . the condition of slaves. With the progress of . civilization, however, this principle has been . modified. According to the modern doctrine, t the relations ol ifie people towards their sove f reign or ruling power, in whatever form of » government, are changed ; but their relations r towards each other and their laws, as before - ) stated, remain until modified or altered hy the i new governing power Upon tins subject Grolius, in his work (hook 3, chapter 15, section 9,) citing the case oftheJcws, which might perhaps be referred to from much higher authority, savs ; “Unis the government continued among the Jews in the Sanhedrim, even after Archelaus had been stript of his kingdom. And Evagoras, King ofCv prus, (as Diodorons relates,) said he would obey the King of Persia, but that as one King did another.” Upon the text above, so Jar as it relates to the Jews, the author has a note in the following words: ° “They (the Jews) likewise followed their own laws, and punished their own delinquents, according to the customs of their own countrv.” This, however, was the case only so Jong as the Romans permitted it : for Josephus ex pressly observes that, “after Jerusalem was taken by Pompey, the Jews lost their liberty, and became subjects,” From this it will be seen that, even in that early day, after the con quest of their country, the laws and customs of the Jews were continued until changed and abrogated by the conquerors, the Romans. Upon the same point Vattel says, in his work upon the law of nations, page 451 : “A prince, taking a town or a province from his enemy, can Justly acquire over it the same rights only as belonged to the sovereign against whom he had taken arms. War authorized him to possess himself of what belonged to his enemy; if he de prives him of the sovereignty of a town or province, lie acquires it as it is, with ail its limitations and modifications.” Again he says, on page 452: “ But at present war is less terrible to the subject; things are transacted with more humanity ; it is a gainst one sovereign that another makes war, and not against the quiet subjects. The conqueror lays his hands on the possessions of the State, on what belongs to the public, while private persons are permitted to retain theirs. They suffer but indirectly by war; and to them the result is, that they only change mas ters.” And, again, she same author says, on page 453: 1 b “ Wo arc always to remember that the law of Na ture permits no injury to be done loan enemy, unless in taking measures necessary for a just defence, ami a reasonable security. Some princes have only im posed a tribute on it, others have been satisfied* with stripping it of some privileges, dismembering a pro vince, or keeping it in awe by fortresses; others, as their quarrel was only with the sovereign in person, have left a nation in the full enjoyment of all its rights only setting a sovereign over it. But if the conquer or thinks proper to retain the sovereignty of the van quished State, and has such a right, the manner in which he is to treat the State still flows from the same principles. If the sovereign be only the just object of bis complaint, reason declares that by his conquests lie acquires only such rights as actually belonged to the dethroned sovereign; and, on the submission of his people, ho i- to govern it according to the laws ol the State.” I I’csu authorities sustain the position I as sumed. They could he multiplied to a much greater extent. But £ said the same principles had been settled hy solemn adjudication in the English courts, and I novv ask the attention of the 11 onseto one case decided hy Lord Mansfield i fep’orled in Ist Cowper, 205 T T fie'juinclples involved in it arc very analogous, indeed, to many that may arise out of our late war, and the conduct of our Executive in assuming the power to lay and collect duties iu the Mexican ports, out of our own citizens, without autho rity of law. Campbell, the plaintiff, was a natural horn subject of the kingdom of Great Britain, and on flic 3d of March, 17(53, purchased a planta tion in the Island of Grenada, which had been taken from the French hy the British arms in open war some time before. The King, hy virtue of his royal prerogative, imposed a duty of four and a half per cent, upon till sugars ex ported from the Island of Grenada. Campbell paid the duty, and then brought an action against the collector for the money. The whole doctrine and principle of conquest as recog nised hy the courts of Great Britain seem to have been discussed. The reporter says the case was very elaborately argued four several limes, and Lord Mansfield finally delivered the unanimous opinion of the court. And in that opinion I call the attention of the House to the following principles, stated on the2(»'t!i and 209th pages of the Ist volume of Covvper’s Reports: “ A great deal has been said, and many authorities cited, relative to propositions in which both sides seem to be perfectly agreed; and which, indeed, arc too clear to be controverted. The stating some of those propositions which we think quite clear, will lead ns to see with greater perspicuity what is the question upon the first point, and upon what hinge it turns. I will state the propositions at large, and the first is this : “A country conquered by the British arms be comes a dominion of the King in the right of his crown; and, therefore, necessarily subject to the Legislature, the Parliament of Great Britain. “The 2d is. That the conquered inhabitants, once received under the King’s protection, become subjects, and are to be universally considered in t hat light, not as enemies oi aliens. “ The 3d, That the articles of capitulation upon which the country is surrendered, and the articles of peace by which it is ceded, arc sacred and inviolable according to their true intent and meaning. “ The 4th, That the law and legislative government of every dominion equally affects all persons and all property within the limits thereof, and is the rule of decision for all questions which arise there. Who ever purchases, lives, or sues there, puls himself under the law of the place. An Englishman in Ire land, Minorca, the Isle of Alan, or the Plantation, has no privilege distinct from the natives. “The sth, That the laws of a conquered country continue in force until they are altered by the con queror : the absurd exception as to Pagans , men tioned in Calvin's case, shows the universality and antiquity of the maxim ; for that distinction could not exist before the Christian era, and in all probability arose from the mad enthusiasm of the Croisadcs. In the present case the capitulation expressly pro vides and agrees that they shall continue to be govern ed by their own laws until his Majesty’s further plea sure be known. “ The Glh and last pro; osition is, That if the King (and when I say the King i always mean the King without the concurrence of Parliament) has a power to alter the old and to introduce uew laws in a con quered country, this legislation being subordinate, that is, subordinate to his own authority in Parliament, he cannot make any new change contrary to fundamen tal principles : he cannot exempt an inhabitant from that particular dominion; as, for instance, from the laws of trade or from the power of Parliament, or give him privileges exclusive of his other subjects; and so in many other instances which might be put.” The fourth and fifth of these propositions contain the principles upon which I rely. The fifth contains in express terms what 1 have stated, that “ the laws of a conquered country continue in force until they arc altered by the conqueror .” Some stress in this case seems to have been laid on the terms of capitulation at the time of the conquest. Amonsl other things, it is said it was expressly stipulated “that Grenada should continue to be governed by its present laws until his Majesty's further pleasure.” So far as that is concerned, the case is identical with the conquest of New Mexico and Califor nia. General Kearny, in his proclamation at Santa Fe, on the 22cl August, 1846, uses this language ; ft “ It is the wish and intention of the United States i to provide tor New Mexico a free government, with i die |‘oseilile delay, similar to those in the I nited e l '?i te | * and l^lc people of New Mexico will then he d *7* . on to cx ercise the rights of freemen, in electing j their °w« representatives to the Territorial LeyisU j . uie " . unt }l this ca i6c dene the lairs hitherto 3 I * X ?ft enCt vnlt . be c °niinued until changed or wo n I fi fad by competent authority ; and those persons . holding office will continue in the same for the nre e sent > Provided they will consider themselves .mod ci tizens and are willing to take the oath of alic-ianc* to the United States.” r And in his proclamation at Monterey, in fa -5 lifornia. on the Ist day of March. 1847. he uses j similar language, as follows: i ! r ■ “It is the desire and intention of the United States i to procure for California as speedily as possible a five government like that of their own Territories, aml » ; they will very soon invite the inhabitants to exercise the tights ol free citizens in the choice of their own 3 representatives, who may enact such laws as ihev , deein best adapted to their interest and well-being. . j Hut until this takes place, the lairs actually in e.r istence whichare not repugnant to the Const'll a ■ r tion of the Lnited States , will continue in force until they are revoked by competent authority, and persons in the exercise of public employments will for the present remain in them, provided they swear to maintain the said constitution, and faithfully dis charge their duties.” These proclamations were the terms of the capitulation. By the promises and assurances therein given the people were induced to sur render, and offer no further resistance to our arms. And, according to the opinion of Lord Mansfield just read, the terms of the capitula tion in each case, hy the laws of nations, would he held “ sacred and inviolable according to their true intent and meaning ” But, sir, the same rule would apply even if there had been no such let ms ol capitulation. The capitula tion only increases the obligation to adhere to the general rule that the Jaws of a conquered people, with the exception before stated, con tinue in force until altered hy the new govern ing or conquering power. It remains for me now to show that the same principle has been repeatedly recognised and settled hy onr own Supreme Court. For this purpose I refer, first, to the opinion given by Chief Justice Marshall in the case of the Ame rican Insurance Company et ul. vs. Carter, Ist Peters, 542. In this case the learned judge used the following language: “ The constitution confers absolutely ou the Gov ernment of the Union the powers of making war and of making peace; consequently that Government pisscsses the power of acquiring territory either by conquest or by treaty. The usage of the world is, if a nation he not entirely subdued, to consider the hold iiig of conquered territory as a mere military occupa tion until its file shall he determined at the* treaty of peace. If it bo ceded hy the treaty, the acquisition is confirmed, and the ceded territory becomes a part of the nation to which it. is annexed ; cither on the t -rms stipulated in the treaty of cession, or on swell as its new master shall inqio.se. On such transfer ot terri tory i» has never been held that the relations of the inhabitants with each other undergo any change. I’heir relations with their former sovereign are dis solved, and new relations are created between them and the Government which has acquired their terri tory. Fhe same act which transtiers their country transfers the allegiance of those who remain in it. And the law, which may be denominated political is •uv uiia gVfiviut ev/uu uct ui iiiuitiu uai .i remains in force until altered by the newly created power of the State.” Again, in the same case, page 544, he uses this language: “ It has been already staled that all the laws which were in force in Florida, while a province of Spain, tliose excepted which were political in their charac ter, which concerned the relations between the peo ple and their sovereign, remained in force until alter ed by the Government ol United States.” In the same case, Mr. Justice Johnson, of South Carolina, in giving his separate opinion, used the following language. 1 read from Ist Peters’s Reports, page 517 : “ The right, therefore, of acquiring territory is al together incidental to the treaty-making power, and perhaps to the power of admitting new States into the Union ; and the government of such acquisitions is of course left to tlie legislative power of the Union, as lar us that power is uncontrolled by treaty. By the latter we acquire, either positively or sub mode, and hy the former dispose of acquisitions so made ; and in case of such acquisitions, I sec nothing in winch the power acquired over the ceded territories can vary from the power acquired under the law of nations by any other Government over acquired or ceded territory. The laws, rights, anti institutions of the territory so acquired remain in full force until rightfully altered by the new Government.” Here it is expressly affirmed that the lairs, rights, and institutions of the country so acquired remain in force until rightfully altered hy the, niw Government. But, sir, this principle has been repeatedly decided hy the same tribunal. I have another case before me, in 12 Peters’s Reports, page 410, in which the same doctrine is held, and a long list of cases cited in which it is also affirm ed. This is the case of Strother vs. Lucas, and was an action of ejectment for two lots of ground in St. Louis, Missouri; and where it became necessary to review the laws that were in force there at the time of the acquisition of Louisiana. Judge Baldwin gave the opinion of the court, and used the following language : « The state in which the premises are situated was formerly a part of the territory first of France, next of Spain, then of France, who ceded it to the United States by the treaty of 1803, in full propriety, sove reignty and dominion, as she had acquired and held it, (2 Peters, 301, &c.) by which this Government put itself in place of the former sovereigns, and bee one invested with all their rights, subject to their concomi tant obligations to the inhabitants. (4 Peters, 512; 9 Peters, 736; 10 Peters, 330, 335, 726, 732, 736.) Both were regulated by the law of nations, according to which the rights of property arc protected, even in the case of a conquered country, and held sacred and inviolable when it is ceded by treaty with or without any stipulation to such effect; and the laws, whether in writing or evidenced by the usage and customs of the conquered or ceded country, continue in force tdl altered hy the new sovereign.” —(8 Wheaton, 539 ; 12 Wheaton, 528, 535 ; 6 Peters, 712; 7 Peters. 86, 87; 8 Peters, 444, 465; 9 Peters, 133, 736. 747, 748, 749; Oowper, 205; 2 Veasy, sr., 349; JO Peters, 305, 330, 721, 732, &c.)” Here, again, is a clear and distinct recogni tion of the same principle, with the declaration that the “ laics, whether in writing or evidenced hy the usage and custom of the conquered or ceded country, continue in force till altered by the new sovereign with a long list of authorities upon the same point, which I deem it useless to con sume the lime of the House hy referring to » even if my brief hour would permit. Gentle men can take them and read them at the-r lei sure. But why need 1 say more upon tins point? Is it not well known and perfectly no lotions in this country that all the local and municipal laws which were in force in Honda mid Louisiana at the lime ul their acquisition • arc still in force, except so far only as they have been altered since? Upon what other princi ple is it that the civil law prevails in Louisiana to this day ? And now, Mr. Speaker, if such be the de cisions of onr own Supreme Court upon this point, as I presume no gentleman upon this Hoor will venture to gainsay or deny, there is but one other question left, and that is, what was the law upon the subject of slavery in Cab-
