Washington sentinel., 1854-07-18

one of the States, but still remained in all the
others, Pennsylvania included, at the time the
Constitution of the United States was formed.
With the few exceptions expressly provided
for in that instrument, it was the design OF the
Constitution 10 recognise and protect what
ever institutions each State acting for ITSELF
had or should establish or legalize The
people of each State were left entirely free to
choose for themselves what kind of domestic
institutions they would have, and so soon and
so long as each State should thus determine
| ii became the duty of the federal government
under the Constitution, to protect such institu.
tons in the several States, as they should be
found to exist. For instance, Pennsylvania
was slayeholding State at the time of the
adoption of the Constitution, and remained SC
more than quarter of century before the
institution ceased under the decree Of her own
people. So long as Pennsylvania continued
TO legalize slavery by her own laws and con
stitution, the Constitution of the United States
recognized and protected the institution OF
| slavery within her limits, as solemnly and i'm
! peratively as it now recognizes and protects
the prohibition which Pennsylvania has i'm.
posed on slavery within her own limits. The
same remark is applicable to New Jersey, New
| York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New
4
| and protected slavery within their limits at the
| time, and for long period subsequent to the
adoption of the federal Constitution and each
of them has since abolished and prohibited
slavery without the consent or interference of
Congress. No man denied the right of each
of these States, under the Constitution to re-
tain the institution of slavery, so long as they
chose to do so-no man denied their right 10
abolish it at the time it was abolished in each
by voluntary action of their own people and
presume that no man will now deny the right
OF each of these States to introduce slavery,
provided their own people should deem it Just
| and wise to do so by the modification of their
local constitution and laws.
1t being conceded, then, that the original
States, one and all, have the undoubted right,
| under the Constitution, to introduce or exclude
| slavery at pleasure, with what reason can it be
contended that different rule may or should
be applied to the new States. 1t hardly re-
quires an argument to prove that each State of
this Union must be equal in respect to its
rights and powers to every other State. The
States are sovereign and independent In all
things except where the Constitution of the
United States has imposed limitations Those
limitations apply alike to all the States of the
Union, new and old, slaveholding and non
slaveholding. No other limitation upon the
sovereignty Of State can be imposed than
those contained in the Constitution, none can
be imposed by act of Congress, none by any
branch OF the federal government, none by any
earthly power, except the Constitution of the
United States. Entire and perfect equality,
| therefore, among all the States of the Union,
in respect to their rights of legislation and SOW
ereignty, is a cardinal and fundamental prin-
ciple In our republican system. Indeed, the
moment you impose upon the rights of any one
State limitation which the Constitution has
not enjoined upon all the States, such State
| ceases TO be STATE rithin the meaning OF the
Constitution. Such limitation produces infe-
riority where the Constitution has provided for
perfect equality. Under the clause of the Con-
stitution providing for the admission of "new
States" as general thing, Congress is invest
ed with discretion to admit or reject; but in
the event a new State is admitted into the
Union, 1t must come in as State, with all the
powers and rights of State under the Consti.
tuition, and on an equal footing with the origi-
nal States in all respects whatsoever. There
tors, whatever powers are possessed by any one
State-old or Dew--in respect to slavery, may
of right, under the Constitution, be exercised
by each and every State. In pursuance OF
this sovereign right, which is common to all
the States, sixteen Of the States of the Union
have abolished or prohibited slavery, while the
other fifteen States have recognized and pro-
tected it within their limits. This great prin-
ciple was distinctly recognized and solemnly
guaranteed in the compromise measures Of
1850. Applause.
The acts for the organization Of the Terrific
ries of New Mexico and Utah, each contains
| the stipulation that when said Territories or
any part thereof shall be admitted into the
Union as States they shall be received with or
without slavery, as their constitution shall pre-
scribe at the time of admission" The Ne.
braska bill, which has passed Congress at this
session, also carries out the same principle in
the precise language of the compromise meas
ures of 1850, which have just quoted. [Greai
applause.
In 1920 Congress passed an act to authorize
! the people Of Missouri Territory to form con-
stitution preparatory TO their admission into
the Union as State, on an equal footing with
| the original States in all respects whatsoever.
The 8th section Of the act declared that slavery
should be forever prohibited in all the territory
acquired from France north Of 36o 30<, and
not embraced within the limits Of the proposed
State Of Missouri. This prohibition never went
into practical operation, for the reason that the
country was filed with hostile savages, and
set apart by law and treaty as an Indian terri
tory, from which all white men were excluded
by severe penalties. Hence the 9Th section of
the Missouri act which relates to slavery, has
remained a dead letter on the statute book for
thirts-four years, having no civilized people for
it to operate upon, and its application to the
Indians being necessarily excluded by acts of
Congress known as the Indian intercourse laws.
On the introduction Of the Nebraska bill, there
fore, the question arose whether legal effect
should now be given for the first time to this
old prohibition--in other words, whether Con-
gress should, as the result of its action, now
apply the Wilmot proviso to Nebraska and
Kansas! To have gwen legal effect to this old
prohibition would have involved total aban
donment of the cardinal principles Of the com.
promise measures Of 1850 so far as they re-
lated TO the organization Of new territories
These measures rested upon the great princi-
pies Of selfgoyernment, which secures to every
people the night TO form and regulate their own
domestic institutions In their own way, subject
only TO the Constitution Of their country. Ap.
plause.
| Why should not the people Of Nebraska and
Kansas be permitted 10 decide this question Of