Mr. Rives And Law Of '93

"But more than al!, and beyondall, he would ask Southern gentlemen how tliey would then stand in regard lo that great fundamental act, which constituted tha solé secur i Vyof the South as to the retention of their slave properl y?' He reíefred' to the act of 1793; ft was the act for the delivery of fugitive slaves; and gentle-: men must remember, that it had been sölemnly decided by the Supreme Courlilv tlie great case of Prigg vs. Cómmonwealth of Pennsylvania-, that the power of enfoTcing'such a delivery was exclusively in the hands of Congress. TFre individual States had no posver to poss such a law, and if they did it' ttould be under ílat decisión, nüííand' void. Now, if gentlemen sanctioned the right of a mere majority toconsummatesuch an act.' as now proposed, involving consequencesso important, another majority mighttaketheir ready revenge in repealing the act of '93, which would in practicó a mount: tor a virtual PROCLAMATIOÑ OF UNIVERSAL -trad f rom the Speech of Senator ■ fiives, . of Va., on the Texas question." We see here how slaverholdèrs regard: the law of '9. By Ihat ]nw fhe (ree States are madea hunting field where men andwomeiraroI tobe chased down by man hvnfers and j blooJ iiouncfs as ifthey were wild beasfs, to be dragged off to bondage fromour very housesj sanctutiries and churches;Thís íaw is the "great fundament act" and "sole security" for all the sïavery in the United States, and the Tree States are but the fortresses and'bulwarks for the sïave power, from which' theditve is shot down, or caughtand dèlivered ovef to whips and chains and all the.-woes of' sl'aver'y.The free Norlh af e ihe slave holders,. and the South the slave owners. The repeal of this abominable net of '93; u-ouJd in sobstance and effect release the slaves and give "universal emancipalion."Mr. Rives is ttfiïg-irnd decláred hinrseíf ín favor of Texas annexation, ttut opposed to the resolutions passed for the purpose. His views are probably tY.& same as Mr. Clay's oh that subjectr ana all or most slaveholding whigs. They would have Texns, but not in such woy as to injure tiie slaveholder, or Reífr the slave, nor to the injury of the whig party. They would 'be glad to see ft buf in such a mode as to preserve the interest of slavery. And Mr. Rives is afraíd we will repeal this law. Now let u$ do ií. What say you, ye whigs and demócrata will yon go for the repeal of that nefarious law? It is an outroge upon the North, as well ns upon íhc slave. It is au