The daily union., 1854-03-05
to crown all. the constitution contains hi. remarkable

70 crown all the constitution contains this remarkable
provision:
The citizens Of each State shall entitled TO all hs
PfeRes and inniiias OF citizens OF he States
obseye; IL is not that The citizens of The United State.
sAa nave The same privileges everywhere, but .he cit
zens oi sach Sts" The citizen secures his equality
through that of his State mol il his individual canac,,y
pa oy virtue OF nat fundamental condition OF the
nion the equality Of his State Nor s this equality Of
me States lefi matter OF moral Obligation By
gwen 70 secure the right
Well now, sir. The constitution especially declares the
heioles OF The United States 10 be ibe property Of the
uned Staes II speaks OF the territory or other prop
eriy Of The United States Il happens that the onIy
ccihc ennmera OF the property OF the United States
mace ~ regard 2 this very matter Of territory, and
ssaia 70 iha tne States are equally entitled it, IT,
have shown the States are regarded as EQUALS in the
view o. The constitution they not equally entitled 10
al al ~, we peDea!s Moving from this property, well
All ,e sehents 10 be derived from the government itself.
MI PRESIDENT have said that according to the spirit
q q nis instrument The States much entitled to
snare equally IN The benefit TO be derived from that public
Eropery as they IN the benefits OF general legislation
The benefits 10 be derived from ha. property are two
iod he one IS the reei from taxes, which il afforded
devong the proceeds OF The sales OF these lands to
Inc public use; and the other, aud far greater benefit
consists IN s uses Tor the occupation and settlement OF
our fellow citizens.
Now, SIR suppose this government, were to provide in
regard 70 me money which raised from the sale Of
those lands that should be all distributed among the
slaveholdnK States and that the sayehodng States
should get OF it, would not the sense of Justice in
every breast revolt al But il far worse say
the whole uses and benefits 10 be derived from its occupa
non shall be reserved 10 the ehodng States, and
that the siaveholdng States get none OF them
suppose there was positive eac,ment that these lands
might be settled by citizens OF Massachusetts New York.
pennsylvania, and Connecticut but that they should not
be settled by citizens OF Virginia and South Carolina, and
other slave States would everybody that II
unconsiiiulonallha i violating the spirit OF the
constitution Why Because il would impair the equal
ny OF the States VIII be accomplishing the sa ne
thing indirectly to say that those who are not slave
owners shall go there but the STAKEHOLDER shall not
Does II not accomplish precisely the same thing, ex-
rectiy?
But, Mr, President. know that this is view which
IS so obvious, 10 be sought 10 be evaded upon the
ground THAI The constitution OF the United States which,
BY implications prescrbes this equality Of the States. does
not apply 10 the Territories Of The United States; and
have authority eminent that of Daniel Webster for
the assertion He seems, far as trace his opin
from single dic,uu Of Chief Jusiice Marshall in Can
ers case and 10 have rested upon lie fact that has
been decided that judges might be appointed for the Ter
constitution. Sir, think show that such decs-
ion moi inconsistent with the opinion that the
siution did apply 10 the Territories; that there were
cIfhcues in supposng that II did not apply to the Ter
rtoriss which Mr. Webster himself did NOT meet; and
That ihe Supreme Court have IN series Of cases dse
did cover the Territories OF the United States.
Sir, when The advocates OF this doctrine have been
pressed 10 The power OF Congress to do within the
Territories what is prohibited by the constitution from
dong al all, such as TO establish religion, &C., Of
them have pretended say il could do any OF these
things When asked how, If the constitution did
creature of the constitution nobodynot even the intel
eci OF Webser-could preseuta sufficient answer; and
the only ground upon which il must rest this decis
ion OF the courts in regard TO the territorial judges which,
seeming 10 be inconsistent with the constitution, gave
rise 10 the inference that in The contemplation Of the
court the constitution itself did extend to these
Territories can show think not only that the Su-
preule Court has repeatedly decided that the constitution
extends 10 the Territories bni that the decision in regard
position. ln the case OF Loughborough u.s. Blake, Is
Wheaton, 3i7,) Judge Marshall. in delivering the oTdn-
ion Of The court decides that the power TO lay taxes, du
lies, imposs, and excuses exiends 10 the Ierories 0
well to ibe States Speaking of the provision that
"all duties, imposis, and excuses shall be uniform
throughout, The United S,aies,' be says:
viii moi bs confended that the modification Of the
exsnds places which the power itself does
extend The power, then. 10 lay and collect dutes, inn
cised throughout the United saes Does this term desg-
the whole, particular portion Of the American
il given repnbIc, which is
composed OF States and Terriiores"
He decides itis true that Congress required by
the constitution to lay direct taxes upon the Territories,
when they imposed upon the States. But he dis
tnciy declares that when ad they must be imposed ac
oording to The rule of The constitution.
In Canief's q Peters, 2, 5li) Judge Marshall
again delivered the opinion o the court, and said that
Florida governed BY vitrue OF that clause in the
which empowers Congress . mike all need
property Of the United States"
Again be says
The right govern may be the inevitable consequence
Of the rghtto acquire territory Whichever msyb be the
whence the power Is derived. the possession Of
unquestionabe.h
IL in this tha, be decided in favor OF the va
idiiy OF the act OF the territorial legislature creating
judges for Of four years and he did upon
the ground that the constitution Did not apply Florida
lie territorial condition, but because these courts were
not !" constitutional" !" but legislative courts" The de-
risos that the provision the constitution in
gard TO the Judicial power did extend 10 the territorial
judges Not because Congress exercised power in the
Territories independently of the constitution but because
that instrument gave Congress power by
the States, and another in the Territories According
Judge Marshall, Congress, IN legisalng for the Terrific
riss the combined powers of the general and
State government" II this latter capacity that
these territorial judges created, and Il was in this
poR OF view that the law creating them held valid
In decisions since that time, the Supreme Court has
more than once decided that the constitution extends to
the Territories.
In The case OF Pollsrd- lessee against Hagan % How
ard 2I2) Mr. Justice Mckinley delivering the opn-
ion of The court said:
Every constitutional sf Congress is passed by
w OF the PEOPLE OF the United through
their representatives the subjecnrter Of the
meat; and when 80 passed. Il becomes the supreme law
OF the laod and by its force the subject
matter in whatever STATE or Territory il may happen 10
be-"
Again he says, %. Gas D
Every nation acquiring territory by treaty or ofherwise
m subject the consniion snd own
and according to those of
ceding iVaues Law Of Nations. b. l. CHI 49, sec 2lO
2ti, 2s5; apd b. 2. ch. ., 50.