Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1851-07-10
mkshire Mup
I'll ANNOCy=

which the equaN rlghts OF nlah "0i0 'AS' NlJ
announced to the world. We n. ICED In the
success, vouchsaled by kind Providence, in
bloody war in affirmation of those principles
We reioiced in, our belief and assurance that
the Constitution of the United States was
shield to their principles. What different
scene presents Fselfto day. We cast our eyes
abroad, and, instead Of that liberty, which we
had supposed was secured by the Constitution,
we find, secured by it, the liberty oil few, say
one or two hundred thousand, to keep three mil
lions of human beings as much entitled to free
dom as themselves, in absolute bondage; and,
in connection with it, and in support of it, the
further liberty Of ruling over and controlling the
affairs of above twenty millions of people, even
our whole nation! That Shareholders should
claim the liberty to exercise despolic power, is
not very strange; for the whole system of slave
ry is system of despotic power; but that the
people of the northern States should surrender
their rights of freedom TO the despotic claims Of
one or two hundred thousand shareholders, is
passing strange! And doubly strange il is, that
the people of the northern and western States
openly profess condemnation Of and opposition
to slavery in every constitutional form, yet are
practically agreed so much in nothing as in ac-
tuul support 81 this horrid despotlsm of the
shareholders
Is there no way to indulge the freemen of the
northern and western States, to seek and apply
remedy for that evil? There exists prevail
ing sentiment, that slavery must come to its end
not many years hence. The accuracy of this
sentiment is strongly evnced by the late aboli-
ton of slavery in almost all nominally christian
countries, except free, christian america. If
American slavery ceases, it will probably be eff
fected in one of two ways,-either the freemen
will SO far give up party as to cast their ballots
in favor of human liberty, and rescue the pow
ers of government from the shareholders, which
would do it peaceaby,*-or the Lord will send
Moses, or some more Jehu-ke agent, to break
the chains from every bondman.
But it is time to ascertain where we stand,
with regard to the eternal principles Of freedom,
justice, and huEanity, now on this fourth OF
July, A. d. 1851. 1t seems idle to advert to
our boosted free, United States Constitution,
and there read, that one object Of that instru-
ment was, to secure the blessings of liberty to
the inhabitants of the United States, and then
posterity. Men of great influence, but of more
arrogance, tell US, this does not mean slaves
Slaves are not mentioned, they say, in the Con
stitution. True, they are not mentioned as
slaves, but they are mentioned as people, and as
people entitled to be secure in their liberty. i
has become, in measure, useless to read II
the Constitution of the United States, that " the
powers not delegated to the United States by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively
or to the people" We now learn the astound
ing fact that the people and Judges of the indie
pendent States have no right to act or decide
upon this point They have no right to decide
that this or thatpower is reserved to the States
This must all be done by the Judges of the U
s. Courts, and sfhe people must submit with {
loud Amen. II is Of no use to examine all the
powers given to Congress, by the Constitution
and find no semblance of power to pass par
ticular statute, for we are told they have passed
such statute, and the Supreme Court have de-
cided that Congress had power 10 pass 1t, ant
State Legislatures and State Judges must shu
their lips in silence. This astounding doctrine
is relied upon by the Hon. L. B. Peck, as hi.
reason for declining the nomination of candidate
for Governor. The category of his reasoning
seems to be this" The act THE Fugitive Slave
act,) is assailed on the ground of its not giving
the right of trial by jury" And the statute o
1898 was liable to the same objection; and thu
Supreme Cont of the United State, in the case
of Prigg VS.. Pennsylvania, have decided that t
be constitutional; and he alludes to Judges whc
have decided this very act to be constitutional
and he adds" the Vermont Habeas Corpus act
conflicting with this statute, is unconstitutiona
and void. 1t will readily be perceived, that al
rests, not upon the Constitution of the United
States, but upon a decision of the Supreme
Court in the Pigg case, that certain powe
exercised by Congress, was given them by thu
Constitution. He does not seem to notice thu
OPINION of Daniel Webster and many others
that Congress has no such power. Nor does he
notice the various other objections, very conclu
sivetoo,t to this same act which have been elicitet
in many speeches and publications. These | an
not disposed to collect and insert here. They
are abundanty before the world in papers will
ling to publish what bears against slavery, anC
the domination of the slave power.
Congress have, inherently, no power at all. -
All they have is derived from the Constitution
And when their power to pass particular stat
ute cannot be found in the Constitution, tina
statute is null and void. Not so of statute o
an independent State. Their statu ties are valid
till something is found, valid in its elf which
takes away the right of such State to pass sucl
statute. And every court should pass judgment
upon any statute Of any State, or of the United
States; and, if it is found unconstitutional, it i:
void And all Judges must decide upon theiI
own convictions of right, except Gf we call il
an exception,) of decision of exactly the same
question, arising IN the same shape, by court
OF dernier jurisdiction. Too ready leaning to
TINS exception, may sacrifice just right. There
should be willingness to re-examne important
questions, especially constitutional questions.--
The Supreme Court have retraced their steps
greatly on the subject of the constitutonality Of
laws relating to vested rights. The Constitu-
tlonalty of laws that support slavery should new
er be treated as settled, so long as majority of
the Judges of the Supreme Court are slavehold-
ers, and so long as the slave power wholly inter-
diets the appointment of Judges who are even
suspected of being opposed to slavery. Witness
the rejection of Spencer and Walworth of New