The examiner. [volume] (Louisville, Ky.) 1847-1849, 1848-01-15


from justice, but none in regard 10 abscond.
ing slaves There was, therefore, on obi.
CATION on a free State, unless imposed by
It's own law, to deliver up slave; nor was
there any legal means through which the
master could claim the fugitive. The in.
convenience and collision which frequently
arose from this state of things led 10 the
above provision in the Constitution.
The power TO institute slavery belongs
exclusively 10 the community in which il
exists. In the language OF Chief Justice
fancy, in Groves rs Slaughter, Is Peters,
SOB, a State ''has a right to decide for itself
whether it will or will not admit slaves to
be brought within IFS limits from another
State, either for sale or for airy other pun.
pose; and also to prescribe the manner and
mode in which they may be introduced and
70 determine their condition ald treatment;
and this action cannot be controlled by Con.
gress, either by virtue Of IFS pOwelao regu.
late commerce, or by virtue Of any Other.
power conferred by The Constitution oil the.
United States"
And in the case Of Pngg rs the Common,
wealth Of Pennsylvania, 10 Peters, Gil, the
Supreme Court says "The state ol' slavery
is deemed TO be mere municipal regulation
founded upon and limited TO the range of
the territorial laws" and sit is manifest from
this consideration, that, If the Constitution
had not contained the clause for reception
every non-slaveholding State in the Onion
would have been at liberty to have declared
free all runaway slaves coming within its
Limits, and to have given them entire immu-
nifty and protection against the claims Of
their masters"
The true construction Of the Constitution
IS, that implied powers can only exercise in
carrying into effect a specific power. And
this implication is limited to such measures
as shall be appropriate to the object This
IS an admitted and safe rule of construction.
1t is believed to he the only one which has
been sanctioned by statesmen, and iurists
Powers exercised beyond this is not derived
from the Constitution, but must depend upon
an unlimited discretion. And this is des-
potism.
Now there is no specific power in the
Constitution which authoIises the organiza-
lion Of Territorial Government Such a
power was given in relation TO the District
Of Columbia, and it was equally necessary
in regard TO other Territories. But if this
power be implied from that specific power
given TO regulate the disposition Of the pub
lie lands. it must, under the above rule, be
limited TO means suitable 10 the end in view
IL Congress go beyond this in the oTganiza-
zion OF Territorial Government, they act
without limitation, and may establish a
monarchy. Admit that they may organize
Government which shall protect the lands
purchased and provide for the administration
Of Justice among the settlers. it does by no
means follow that they may establish slavery.
This is a relation which must be created by
the local sovereignty. Ii is a municipal
regulation oflimited extent, and, necessarily,
OF an equal limited origin. Ii is domestic
relation over which the Federal Government
can exercise no control. And. above all,
the institution Of slavery is not within any
implication which can be drawn from the
power TO regulate and dispose Of the public
lands or other property Of the United States
As before remarked, slaves are not treated
in the Constitution as property. They are
made property by the local law
The Supreme Court OF the United State!
have decided that, under the power to regU,
late commerce among the States, Congress
could not interfere with the slave trade be.
tween the States. And with how much
greater propriety and force Of argument
could such power be sustained than tht
power to establish slavery in a Territory
In the latter there is nothing from whicI
the power can be applied, while the former
is admitted to include all commercial deal
ings among the States. And il was upor
the ground that in the Constitution slave,
were treated as persons and not ms property
that were held not to come within the com
meiciaI power. If Congress, under AM
implied power, may institute slavery in
Territory Of the United States, on mucI
stronger grounds may they exercise the com
meIcial power over the transfer and sale 9
| SAofNH biN NNAeAo'
In the Territory OF Louisiana snd Florida
Congress recognized and, TO limited eI
tent, regulated slavery. But, as before re
marked, slavery existed in those Territorie
at tie time they were ceded TO the Unite
States; and, in the treaty ofcession Of Louis
lana, the United States bound themSelvo
to protect the property of the citizens
Slaves in that Territory was considered &
property, and were within the treaty. An
il is singular thai this fact in the Missoul
controversy was not, | believe, relied upo
by the South. Ii was the strongest posito
that could have been taken on that side {
the question.
; II free territory be admitted and Conges
have no power 70 institute slavery within j
the territory must remain free until the pee
pie shall form State Government, then tn
question may arise, in the exercise Of TIL
, , sovereign power, whether slavery shall b
admitted. -eel
Can the President and Senate by treat
establish slavery in the new Territory
Such power il not found in the Constitl
ZION nor in the laws Of nations
q Anether iuuufhcTenf Donation.
4 =. IL.