The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-12-02


force constitution, unobjectonabe in its pro-
visions upon the of those Territories in advance
OF such admission and against their consent II contain
ed provisions not requisite to effect that entire harmony
with the federal constitution necessary for their admsslos
or Provisions hostile the interests agreeable to
the wishes of those citizens could the attempt to impose
1t upon them be successfully defendedl suggest these
queries TO show that the besowa upon Congress by the
convention OF such powers of sovsregntyand the excu
SION OF the institution of domestic servude is one-would
nave been an INVASION OF the tere rtghS OF the people
Of such Territories This objection connected with
that arising from the injustice 10 those citizens whom
IS sought IN this case to dcbar from emigration 10 those
Territories lest they may have influence to effect he
adoption OF certain rules IN the fundamental political
laws OF the new States when organized and is without
reference TO the outrage upon the right of all the States
to participate in The beneht of these Territories the COM
mon property of all Is il equally violation of the
elemental laws of this government to effect by indirect
restraining means, the formation of State government
TO please aorty OF Congress on this subject if done
by dtrec cOero0n Is not the adoption OF here,
tending to ramme or feer the exercise OF the absolute
sovereignty OF the people of the Territories TO SUPER
induce such exercise IN particular manner equally an
patton if Congress to dictate every word and
letter OF the State constitution by imperative mandate
The fact is, much extensive power than that grant
ed to Congress with respect to Territories proposed
in the conventions under which Gf rghlfuly delegaed)
Congress could have confirmed and adopted the ordinance
of 7S7 framed and imposed upon the Territories other
similarly prescribed fOrns ot Ehe members
of that convention had not forgotten the doctrines of the
wings OF the revolutions and rejected oil those proposi
onS AS to the argument founded upon the absence of
positive prohibitions expressly restraining Congress from
exercising such sovereign powers as to Territories
would have been absurd for those who framed, and
those who adopted and established the federal constt-
ton, to have inserted such prohibition as to power
which they had no right to delegate. III. e..lr
The solitary provision III the federal constitution
horizng any scrutiny Of interference with, in any
wise by the federal government as to the constitutions of
the States old or new, is that IN section OF article d.
STIMULATING that "the United States shall guarantee to
every State OF this Union republican form of govern
ment,' &c. This is the defined limit of its review of
such constitution either before after admission OF the
State, and any inermeddling or action by Congress at
any time direct or tndrcd, outside that limit, IS an un
constitutional encroachment on the rights Of the people
of the State thus nerIeed WITH and upon tho rights OF
the Others whose citizens may be Djurously affected by
such irregular obtrusion 5as +. 81
Mr. President will reerae that if the constitutional
authority OF Congress, with respect to slavery and slaves
lis not held since 1908, to be limited to legislation respect
ling the emigration or Importation OF persons from
abroad the consequence follows that the power Of Con-
trict of Columbia and as to forts, arsenas, dock
yards public lands, &c. and as TO all the Territories (ex
cep the of abolishing the institution of domes
tic serviude aoin State against it's consent and by
direct and positive mandatory congressional edictl Is
penary and unreained 1t can then assail the nslitu
ton in the States, by laws restraining the locomo
ton of citizens with their slaves beyond the limits OF
such State, and it infct innumerable annoyances
in his State, by singing out this species of property
the subject of special regulation exacton and restraint
and by withholding the operation OF rcmedsal e''aetmen
from it. Is this doctrine 10 be tolerated! There are some
who boldly maintain it, but the South has hitherto been
assured they few in numbers, and mostly ignorant
misguided fanatics having little influence, and unworthy
of serious notice. Recent indicate the
sion of auxaries to their ranks hope the comblna
ton of the ultra abotoniss and others actuaed by hos
raying together under the flag distinguished by the
cag trap motto of Stree labor and free soa may not re-
suit in thetesng OF this doctrine When the erss comes
together. Equally dangerous anenies to tho Union are
those who. to create distinction between the States and
by Congress to the latter. and to prevent immediate
element in the slayeholdng States as to their own Sc
curty admit that the States are all direct parties to
fho 1lt,nn md aV
cal guarantees in against congressional legislation di
recty affecting the Sates which, they contend, onot
exist but to the States and that as to this District &C.,
and to all Territories, Congress is without restraint
1t is said Territories necessarily dependent on Con-
gess for the primary OF their governments.
and for their supports and that penary power to govern
without restraint results from such dependence and such
necessity AS have before admitted, imperative
ty may (f not justify! the exercise of power even
necessity is not only without right, but without excuse.
Is the exclusion of the South and of it's institutions from
those Territories demanded by such memorable ,ecessy2
Is it indispensable to the safety and security of those Ter
rtores and the interests of the federal government there
in that the South should be denied all participation in
them If not there for the exercise Of
such power The dependent and defenceess condition.
the weakness Of the people of far distant and sparsey
populated territory, without effective means of resistance
to federal tyranny, which State may have not merely in
its strength but in the sympathy arising from close
neghborhood and associations and the congenal interests
of sister Statesmay be prudential consideration, weak
ening motives for Withholding the exercise of arbitrary
and usuped power by the federal government as to Ter
Have the astue of those who contend for such right
pointed out single guaranty to the States contained in
the constitutions in anywise relating to slaves and sa-
vcry that is expressly confined to the States and that
does not extend to citizens of the Territories Has the
distinction they assert been established Is the guaranty
in the constitution, the 9th and 10th mendmenswhich
stipulae that the enumeration in the constitution OF
certain rights shall not be construed 10 deny dspar-
age ohersrefanedby hepeope y and that the powersnot
delegated the United States by the constitutions nor pro-
hbited by to the States, reserved to the States re-
specvey, to the peopic"imed to the States excu-
sively Is the term "people" there employed IN contra
fined exclusively the people OF the STATES. 1t is not
invoke applicableas meant to include "the peo-
pe-the citizens of the United States IN the 1erraoreS
all citizens wherever located
| concede that the constitution is compact between
the States alone AS have urged it is true that
provision OF that instrument, but that have quoted from
the 4h article REFERS specific and precise TERMS to the
territory beyond the boundaries of the States know
that the Supreme Court of the United States has decided
in the in LIST Peters Reports, which | have before
referred to- that the Judges OF the Territorial courts,
though appointed by the President and Senate, under
authority of an act of Congress- are not constitutional
federal COURTS and that Congress has repeatedly ahmed
by its legislation, that those Judges may be appointed tor
term OF years and "during good behavior, as all
federal Judges required by the constitution TO be-
These concessions afford no ground Tor argument IN
favor of the asserted power As TO the tenure OF JUDICIAL
office III the Territories, il should be nouced' the once
itself, under the Territorial government IS put temporary
The prov the constitution as to the term OF Office
of the Judges obviously applies only to those OF the
PERMANENT federal courts and not to those the oganza
ton and duration OF which renders such provision map
propriac TO them Admitting, however. the correctness
= a.. 1nr,oln trr T.rr