The daily national Whig. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1847-1849, 1847-12-23

The Constitution declares, that Congress
shall have mower seto exercise exclusive le-
pislation. in all cases whatsoever" over the
District which may become the seat OF 10
vernment of the United States, "by ces-
sion Of particular States, and the acceptance
Of Congress.
The extent Of all grants Of power is de-
termined by the extent Of authority to con-
fer the same, which the grantor possesses at
the time Of making the grant. The States
which assembled in the Convention that
framed and completed the Constitution, were
independent and sovereign bodies, and they
retained all the attributes of sovereignty and
independence, which they did not part with
when they created the federal charter. Their
grants Of power are invariably limited to the
accomplishment Of the objects proposed to
be attained by the act Of union. The grant
ors never Invested themselves, in any case,
Of supreme power, except for specific pur-
poses.
Now, it never was the intention Of the
States to give to the United States any pow
er over the fundamental local institutions OF
society, to establish them anew in territory
Of the United States, where they did not
exiss, or to alter, abolish, or modify them
where they already exist There isno grant Of
any such power any where in the Constitu-
ton, and, in the debates upon its adoption,
there is ample proof that such a purpose was
studiously avoided.
One Of these fundamental local institu-
tons arises from the right of given society
to establish the principle by which the de-
scent Of property shall be regulated, and
another springs from the power Of the same
society to grant such personal rights to its
members as it may of its own sovereign will
be pleased to grant Instead Of granting to
the United States the power to establish, al
ter, abolish or modify either Of these insti-
tutions, the Constitution is silent upon the
former, and only recognizes the existence Of
the latter by clause providing for its pro-
lection out Of its proper limits
When the States of Maryland and Vir-
ginia ceded to the United States the ten
miles square, known as the District oil CO.
lumbia, and when the cesson was accepted
by Congress, the ceded territory carried with
it, among others, the two fundamental local
institutions just referred to---the law Of de-
scents and the law Of negro-slavery. Near
ly half century has elapsed since the act
of cession and Congress has not attempted to
change or abolish either of these fundamen-
tai institutions. 1t has correctly construed
its grant Of power over the District thus
coded. The grant of exclusive legisla-
ton, in all cases whatsoever" is limited
grant, limited to the objects for which it was
made, neither Of which is the disturbance of
the law Of descents or the law Of negro
slavery. Congress is not a local legislature
in the strict sense of the term, because it is
not composed Of the representatives Of the
District, which the Constitution alas IS u IN
d.I.its surveillance. ev0r ov'ns q ioeai ie-
ois>dature, ii cannot touch local institutions.
indeed, we have always regarded the ordi-
nary Interpretation Of this clause, giving the
power to Congress to legislate for the Dis
trict, as in utter violation Of the grand prin-
ciple on which the Constitution itself is bas-
ed-the relation between constituent and re-
preventative. 1t is obvious that this consi-
Iteration has always restrained Congress
from legislating for the District as extensive
ly as its wants have demanded. We con-
J. slider the common construction Of this clause
an unconstitutionaAif we may be allowed
the expression, and if Congress were to re-
fuse to legslate for the people Of the Dis
trict at all, it would come nearer executing
the intent Of the Constitution.
If the territory Of the District Of Colum-
bia were only occupied by the persons en-
gagged in the public service, as the forts, ar
senals, and dock-yards of the United States
generally are, the grant Of power to Con-
gress to legislate exclusively over it would
be more in accordance with the spirit Of the
Constitution. But in the cases Of arsenals,
dock-yards, &C., in the slave States, Congress
does not attempt to interfere with the funda-
mental local laws prevailing in their vicini-
ty. And why Obviously because it does
not consider that it has the right. On the
other hand, Congress does not attempt to
alter the fundamental local law OF negro
freedom in the non-slave holding States in
which are United States dock-yards, &c,
and evidently for similar reason If it be
q Just construction, then, of the clause CIV
ing to Congress the power of erchssipe le-
g,sIation over the dock-yards, arsenals, Sc.
Of the United States, not to interfere with
or disturb the fundamental local laws of the
States in the neighborood of these establish
mehts, " Is PLAIN that the construction APP
pines with equal force against interfering with |
Or disturbing the same laws Of the District of |
Columbia The District Of Columbia bears
the same relation to the State of MARYLAND
as the navy-yard at Norfolk does to the
state Of Virginia. The extent of territory
IN the flrst case does not affect the question,
nor does the fact that nearly fifty thousand
DISTINGUISHED people live in the District of
Columbia strengthen the right claimed by
some for the exercise of supreme pc wer by |
Congress over these people No one will
contend that Congress has thu; right to abol-
ish slavery in the Davy yard at Gosport or
Pensacola, or to establish it at the Kittery or
New York navy-yards. Upon what priInci-
pie, then, can Congress be asked to inter-
fere with slavery in the District Of Colam-
bia.