Eaton Democrat. [volume] (Eaton, Ohio) 1843-1856, 1855-08-23

: United States?
We have succeeded at last, after q grea'
deal Of proddine, in obtaining from the aboli.
luon editor OF the Register, his views upon This
subject, or at least, a batch Of stuff, which lie
lclaims is a representation OF his views on this
question. Now, before proceeding further in
The discussion, we will say that we are will
ing at all times 10 treat with respect, in the
: canvass of a question, anything produced by
our adversary, that has the most remote bear
: ing upon the point al issue, but must Gisre-
gard all irrelevant and impairment natter
The greater portion Of The reply of the editor
OF the Register, in his last issue upon the
Question, no sane man would claim has
The most distant %alIusion or bearing upon the
Subject under consideration, and out of chart
ty for The editor we must suppose he does not
think so himself. He certainly cannot be so
feeble in debate his mind cannot be so blunt,
duSky and Gim-his opinion OF the meaning of
our national Charter, cannot possibly be so
incoherent, absurd and ridiculous, as his re-
ply would seem 10 represent. If ii is, human
lily would prevent us from saying anything
more than it is very unfortunate.
Blu: let us examine some OF his responsive
allegations, if any, and test their correctness.
But, one thing before so doing. The editor
claims that the reason he dlSlikes OF present
TO discuss this question is, "th0t this inteLi.
gent community ale pretty unanimous in the
opinion that Congress does possess the power
OF prohibiting slavery in the territories" 10
regard 10 this matter, w are OF The some opin-
ion as the editor of the Register, with this ex-
ception, 10 vii - That we DO not believe there
is a single intelligent man in the county Of
Preble, who has ever perlsed the Constitution
one hour, that believes that Congress pos.
sesses any such Constitutional power. Again,
his is thequestion above all others, that should
be discussed before The people, and well un-
derstood by them, because il is the question
with which you are endeavoTiDg 10 control
this campaign; i: contains the material out Of
which you are endeavoring 10 mould tie new
political mind Of this great and nourishine
State, and if your opinion on this subiec: is
fallaciOus, your effort in its advancement is O
humbug. You know very well that you have !
abandoned every issue with which you used
to enter the political arena, and as O Gernier
resort, have settled down upon this one id, q, {
and now refuse 10 60 INTO lis discussion, lest
Its iallacy be detecte by the masses, and the I
very names OF its advocates wiped in disgust, {
rom our political scroll. But let us notice
some OF obr opponents arguments. In the first e
place he asserts that 'the Constitution of the S
United States, is acknowledged 10 he q highly 0
penal law, which must be strictly applied and e
not miscOnStued," admit it, and thereby p
hangs a tale. He then quotes a part Of THE {
preamble of the Constitution, together with a
Of the expressed powers of Congress,
neither Of which have the most distant allu. =,
sion 10 The territories nor the rights OF the in .
haOitantS thereof. And how, in what manner, r
or IN what light, these quotations effect the -,
point in issue, We confess is a matter we can :;
not see-perhapS he intended that the reader =.
should make out the application himself or
apply 1t in any manner he might see prop
on
n. AT the close Of these quotations he
suddenly makes a -, from which point he =.
'nterS upon a new pilgrimage as follows: "
'The second clause Of The third section of the
Ourlh article Of the Constitution provides that '"'
the Congress shall have power 10 dispose Of III
nd make all needful rules and regulations re- De
pecllng the Territory or other property belong Il,
ng 10 The United States" and section four Of
he same article ordains that "the u States Id
hall guaranty 10 every State in this Union n CO.
form OF government. Thus it is ev- ,
lent that Congress has the power TO l|cgIslate
r the territories; and in the excise thereof it BE-
lis Duty pc lively implied, 10 prohibit the No
Institution olSlayery." -,
Now, hcw the editor of the Register can 1b
nther This conclusion from the words of The ,er
just quoted, is indeed q strange No
Iair-he uses 10 reasoning by which 10 ar MI,
We al it he merely jumps at ii. Besides, in n,
e beginning he aSsertst The Constitution TO be s,r
law that it mustbe applied and not ~,
GStTued-nOw he attempts 10 cOnSrue wide.
and get the advantage Of its constructive
implied powers, tLeieby admitting that i, is I
IT directly conferred; but the editor surely Hal
rgetS that the phrase cor OTHER property" in 9
e portion OF the Coa.tiution quoted BY him, rau
implicitly obliteraieS the idea of even such n erc
as he is seeking 10 make. But for leaI
e Sa Ike OF the argument, let US admit his bic
instruction 10 be correct, and see 10 where pc
will lead US. II The words, "to make all or =
edluI rules &c." clothes Congress with the up
power Of legislating fer The ter den
o!ieS upon all States Righr questions, does it 1"'
t give TO Congress lie Constitutional power
determine what are "necdfulrules md reg =,
ltionS ?" No ore we suppose will claim '
t that it does-nOw is not the power OF pro- opp
,iting slavery in The territories given 10 Con. ~
'sS in the words "to make oil needlul rules, 'e y,
The editor OF the Register SAYS yes, and e, :,
is the duty OF Corgrtss 10 exert that power. uisi
ppose then that Congress should determine that
It slavery was a needlul rule or regulation 'he
the territories, would they not, Mr.. Fdi. rmm
according 10 your own construction, have sure
Constitutions power Of fastening slavery n
On the people OF Ike territories, although orD
Try individual therein might be opposed 10 ,be
If the words 10 make all need(ul rules, , ho
=, gives Congress lie power 10 prohibit If a.
very in the ia,rilor;ae :, o;,,, H..