Squatter sovereign., 1855-02-03
Congress has no Power to Legislate in
the Territories.

! ! the Territories.
1t is not often that We see controversy
between an abolitionist and a P 'o-sfavery
man, In which we are interested.in seeing
the pro-slavery advocate defeated. Wei
must. however, acknowledge ouri pleasure
at the defeat of Mr.. Stephens of; Georgia, |
In his contest with Campbell of Ohio, which |
came off recently IN Congress. And We
hope that In all future contests, !syhere the
pro-slavery advocate acknowledges the
..power" of Congress to legisla in the
Territories at al; particularly Oh the sub
jeet Of slavery, other than she. possesses III
the States; the same result may follow
We take the broad ground that iCongress
has no constitutional right to leaislate for
the Territories on any subject, dxcept for |
the simple disposition Of the land, ,Iand other
subjects only, which she exercise alike in
the States.
1t is true that Congress has exercised
the powerof appointing the super lor officers
for the Territories ever since the first one
was established But preeedents in mat
tiers pertaining to the Cnstitution, does not
make right. We ask those who contend
for this right, to show us the grant of poac-
er In! the constitution for the exeIsise of it.
The right to appoint Governors, Judges or
any tsther officers, any more than for the
appointment Of a Legislature, or tolegistGte
ON dny subject, Gay more than on the sub
ject Of slavery. The men who contend for
the power, usually refer to Tie article
which says, '.the Congress shall have pow
er todispose of, and make such needful
rules: and regulations respecting the Terri
tory, sor other property belonging to the
United States" Now any fair minded
man who will take the trouble to looh at
the history of the times, must know, that
this t4ay referred to tie selling and coeuey-
ing dftke land in a certain section Of cousa-
tsy, donated by some Of the STATES 10 the
General Government; for it is referred to
only as property, and not as granting pow
er to1egislate for the people who might af-
torwerds inhabit it, and for very simple
reason, that there was no territorial gov
ernmsent in existence at that timeI and none
needed. A very different prosision was
made for Columbia, where the y intend
ed to- oElegisEate. There the grant is explic-
1.-THE words used to convey the idea of
Legislation, definite; no danger Of miscon-
struclion. But even admitting tsne power
there to be what is claimed, still it is limit
ed; and as the Constitution is moi made of
india rubber, it will not stretch 10 take in
any thing else than was in it at the time Of
its formation. This word Territory is IN
the singular number, and has the definite
article the, prefxed, which gives lit point
ed sianiieatiou, not a general grant of pow
er to- grow and increase with advancing
years. "The Territory; what Territory
we ask. was referred toz There was no
organized Territory, as we now understand
the term. 1t was only to that particular
body!o land, which had just been given
to the government, and tothat al Ene can it
apply. Suppose there hSd been no such
land owned at that time by the General
Governments and no such provision In the
Constitution as the one referred toz does
any one suppose that the power ts legislate
for the territory of Columbia, as il was then
called, could be tortured to CONVEY power
mo,U, to legislate for Oregon orr Kansas
And yet such power might be claimed
with more propriety. The one IS as def
mite as the other; the one refefred to a
certain district ten miles square, salled ter
ritory of Columbia, the other to Che North
west Territory, as it was afterwards called,
but which at that time had no name
l. The trainers of the Constitution never
imagined that we should have country 50
!, large as ours now is, hence these was no
provision made for the acquisition of ter
ritory, and II is well known that Mr. Jef-
ferson decided that there was no such pow
er in Congress. f We ask then, can Con-
gress By one Unconstitutional act, obtaib a
cos,stitmionaIlright z The answer is OBJ.
yiously no. Then where do they get any
such power or right2 We may be asked
then, who has the right torule in this coun-
try, unconstitutionally obtained2 Obvious
: ly the people-the .squatter Soverei yns.' .
: The Constitution expressly declares tina,
.saii powers not expressly delegated tocorr
! gress or not prohibited to the States, are
reserved to the States or to the people.
! Now we ask who are referred to by the
latter clause, ''or. to the people 2' 1t mus
; of necessity not refer. to the States as ad.
hereing to them, because the trainers O
! fhat instrument did not use expression:
without ideas; but must refer to some pow.
! er that was not delegated to Congress, ane
!. that the States did not possess. Is there