The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1836-1851, 1850-01-23
THE TERRITORIAL QUESTION.

question the debates IN Congress Will prIncl.
,ally hinge during the presc;t session The
provisions OF Mr.. Foote'S bill will bring the
principle by which the issue is to be determined
into fall controversy. The right Of California t"
admission into the Union, as Stale, having
compiled with the acquisitions OF the Act "l
CONGRESS, will form the chief point of the dis.
cussons. The question Of the extent OF the In
risdiciou of Congress over the territories, anI
the po,ica rights of the Territories, themselves
will he treated in connrxion. The S'n'hcin
delegation in Congress Nill be compelled To re
sis, the claim of California to admission, from
her undertaking to do that in her inchnate con.
dion rs Territory, which they deny that
Congress itself can consli,ulonaly do. Ii the
principle is sound lha, the suprcm. power IN
the State cannot righ,fy exclude slavery from
California, how can ii be consistently main
taned that an inferior and delegated InrIsdlc
ton can effect such exclusion! Most assnrrdIy
wha, Congress has not competency to control
or regulate the authority of Il Territory, in
whatever way embodied and exercised, must
fail to Accomplish constuiona!ly.
Ii is no moment TO say that 1t California had
omitted all mention of slavery in her conslt".
lion, she might supply the omission immediate
" after becoming Stale. The difference he.
tween Territorial privileges and State rights
must be preserved, although the line may be
faint tia, divides them. The example OF what
is done in one Territory is soon cited as pre-.
ccdent in another. We do not know what ter.
ri,orial acquisitions may he made hy The United
States. We are unable TO penetrate the de.
signs Of those who may intend new political
arrangements for the Ten miles square MIR.
Douglas has recently introduced in the Senate
resolutions which propose an enquiry into tn"
cxpediency of retrocpding to Maryland all that
norton of the Dslric, of Columbia, which is
. not embraced within its corporate limits, anu
also of so amending the charter of The City ot
Washington as to authorize the Corporation 10
!. exercise the powers Of Legislation usually exer.
cised by the regularly organized Territories OF
the United States. This is substantially assn
ming for Territory or District sovereign pow
ers.
Let it be admitted that convention OF the
people of Territory has the inherent right to
form constitution Of government, excluding
slavery, and what security would remain tor The
RIGHTS Of the shareholders, moi only within the
District of Columbia, bui in any other where
slavery may have had a legal footing! All that
would lie requisite would be to proclaim Stale
,overeigu,y, through popular convention. to
take effect at some future day. 1t appears,
therefore, that there can he no more right in
the people assembled in convention within a
territory to exercise any act Of supreme power
at one stage than another OF their political exis.
,euce-no more rish, to do this in their ado.
lcscence, when ready for admission into the
Union, than ia their infancy, when in the rudi.
mental state Of political society Even alter
n Territory cmerges from chrysalis condition
md is abou, to pu, on the robe of State sove.
reiontv. il is almost needless to observe that the
act Of forming IN independent government is
no, perfected until Congress sets on i, the seal
ofapProbaion.
1t seems TO US lha, this subject has given rise
10 some confusion OF ideas. We have heard
and read in discussions, in relation to il. the
people of Territory compared, as TO political
rights, with the people of u State. We have
seen article ten of the amendments to the con-
s,u,ion that ''lhe powers not delegated to the
United States by the constitution, nor prohlbl.
ted to il by the States, are reserved to the States
respectively or to the people, cited in proof OF
the position, that the word people in the above
article, applies as we'll to the people of Ter
rtory as 10 the people of State. But this is
TO confound personal with political rights. The
people Of Territory possess the nndoublrd
right 10 Habeas Corpus, Trials by Jnry-and
ali the privileges which attach as individuals,
under the broad shelter of the National Char
tor. But to suppose that among the rights re.
served to the people of Territory are any OF
those denominatcd sovereign or supreme, is TO
strain the meaning ofthe terms beyond their
received Specification. In this case, The terms
Estates" and 'people' are, by their jur'aposi
ton and employment in conlrased sense
clearly distinguished Would it not be pre-.
posterous were the people Of Territory. in
any mode or manner, TO assume the right OF
eminent domain, on the ground tha, the owner
shin of the soil has been conveyed 10 them, by
sale. from the United States! or that being al
lowed delegate in Congress gave them the
right to vote in that body, on all questions, in
common with the representatives from the
States!
Iworld seem to follow that there is a broad
and well defined distinction between personal
and political rights in the people Of Territory
that they hold the former from the Constilu
ion, but the latter exclusively from Congress.
The Territories can exercise no general lurs'
dic,ion that is not delegated by that body
The political authority which is dcrivallve is OF
course. not inherent. What may be consl'tu'
,,L., tba ,rol,,tinnory state 6