The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-01-01

la the District of Columbia, or piracy on the high
seas, treason against the United States at large
What would they have said, il they had been told
that this distinction would be brought about in
part by Southern voter, jus, at the time when the
South was cut of from immense territory ae-
qulred chiefly by her blood and toll, and when
the whole North up in arms against slavery?
What, if told that in the midst of these aggres-
sions, (the finale of many others Of like charsc-
teri the South would exhibit the humiliating
spectacle which she now exhibitsl Her sons di-
vided, the majority for tame submission, picking
up crumbs Of comfort from Northern sympathy
and leaning on Northern arms for justicei But
enough of this.
to the law under consideration, than any which
we have hitherto urged. IL has been so managed
as TO completely deprive the President of the par
doning power--or what amounts to the same
thing-to render 1t Intellectual. ''The power of
pardon, says Judge Story, "is general and UNI
qualified, reaching from the highest to the lowest
offenders" (mpeachments excepted.) "The pow
er of remission offnes, penalties and Jortstues is
also included in it. No law can ab,idgs the con-
stitutional powers of the Executive Department,
or interrupt its right to interpose by pardon in
such cases. Now we suppose that as soon
judgement is pronounced against the master, the
slave becomes a freeman, and of course at liberty
to put himself out Of the reach Of his master, in
case Of pardon by the Executive. Indeed n par
don would not return the freeman TO Il state Of
slavery. This we take to be very clear, though
loo III al.,,
suggested it, was never heard Of in this world un.
til the Sensitipes of Washington brought them into
notice. One would suppose that President Fill
more would at least hare taken the opinion Of his AZ
to'ley General before he gave his sanction a law
which made such inroads upon his prerogative.--
But no. this law with all its determines, presented
no difficulties to his mind; but when n law made
to enforce plain principle Of the Constitution in
behalf of Southern rights is presented to him, he
cannot sign it until his scruples removed by a
written opinion from his legal adviser! Aside
from the constitutional objections to this law, there
are others which should stir the Indignation of
every Southern man. 1t operates upon the South
ron alone. 1t forbids him to carry his property
to the District of Columbia for sale but allows ev-
cry other man in the community to carry his there
and sell it. 1t allows the people of the District to
trade in slaves; but allows no one else to do the
like. 1t was yeaned in an agony, trought on by
"save-pens, but it does not forbid save-pens; it
forbids the carrying of single negro to the Dis
trict for sale 1t is like all that Congress has done
in regard to slaves, with single exception.
We have endeavored to show the unconstitu.
tionality Of this law but this is more than could
have been exacted of US. Congress is found to
show LIST, the clause of the Constitution which
justifes it; and End, its authority for making the
offence of the master ,emancpate his slave Where
does Congress find the authority for changing the
relation of master and servant' Suppose like
law applied to another relation. Suppose Con-
gress should pass law declaring that if any man
carried Intoxicating liquors Washington for sale
his children should be taken from him, be absoved
from all obedience to him, and entirely release
from. his authority What would be thought of
that! If Congress can, for the sin of one man,
make another free, why not make the free trans
gressora STARE Why not make all the relations
of life dissoluble by way of penalty' This as
sumption Of Congress is monstrous. But it is
glazed over with plausible pretences. "Who is
not shocked Mt the sight OF save-pens' What
more has Congress done within its domain thas
the Southern States do in thersi' They sup
pose that Congress has the same powers of legis-
lation the District of Columbia, that the
States have over the territory within their
bounds respectively. But that is a gross mis-
take. The powers not granted to Congress,
reserved to the States and consequently,
Congress must find a grant in the Consttu-
ton for every power that it exercises, usurps
power which belongs to the States. And this is
true, whether it legsIates for the District of Co
lumbia or the people at large. On the other hand,
the States may legslate upon any matters whatev-
err, which they have not entrusted to Congress
The difference between them is just the difference
between the agent and the principal. The first
can do nothing but what his letter of attorney au-
thorizes him to do; the latter can do every thing
that he has not disabled himself from doing, by
the letter. The one looks to the charter to know
what he may do; the other looks to it to know
what he may NOT do. The right OF "ercl,rsre egis-
iation" over territory, is not right of general
legislation over it, The District of Columbia does
not belong to Congress; it belongs to the States.
nfy pu'NuoStu ~ Whsu eNlSltu IN all OF
them, and when not one Of them supposed that
Congress would ever dare to intermeddle with it
in any way, Would that the people observed these
distinctions more closely than they do, and en-
forced them more vigorously than they do! Would
they do it--or rather had they done 1.-THE Union
would be perpetual.
To all this, it may be said that any one may
avoid the penalty, by not violating the law. True,
and the same may be said ifCongress should make
the rack the penalty for trotting horse through
the streets Of Washington. Our fathers knew
this when they forbade cruel punishments.
Mississippi LELlUS.
.T~We find the following warning u the
N. Y. Day Book:
LADIES, BEWARE OF Gus CoTToS.-The buy
ers of cotton petticoats are cautioned against
purchasing these articles. One worn by lady