Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1855-09-08

$ that oil husband and Wie, or parent an
{ child, for these matters of domestic polic'
are subjects which should be left to I'll,
Territorial communities. and to dives
them Of the power 10 regulate them, is al
act Of unGitigated dtspotism. The mega
ton Of all power Of Interference by Con
gress in the internal government of III,
Territories, is the true constitutional doc
thine, and the only safe aud PRACTICABLE,
one, and am rejoiced that, after years o
oppostio,-of obloquy, indeed--it is fast es'
iabish,ug itself upon impregnable grounds.
The msapprehension which has pre-
vailed upon this grave subject, is among
the most extraordinary political events o
any time. One would naturally suppose
that in this country, the dogma OF internal
goverDmentby an irresponsible Legislator,
over distant community, unrepresented
III the ruling body, would find but little
favor, aid that the power to establish and
be defended, while the power TO control
all the concerns Of human life would be
left wi,hou, an advocate. The difference
is broad aud practical, and should be the
dearer TO us, as it was the very considera-
ton urged by our Revolutionary fathers in
their contest with The mother country,
which began by argument, but indeed by
arms. 1t was asserted as early as l774,
when the Continental Congress declared
that the English rolonists "are entitled to
free aud EXCLUSIVE power Of Legislation
in their several provincial Legislatures,
where their rights of representation can
alone be preserved. in all cases OF taxation
and internal policy" &c. In that great
struggle, the patriots who conducted it
conceded 10 the British Parliament the
authority to organize colonial governments
but denied their right to. touch the INFER
nal polay Of the people. Aud for the sup
port OF that great principle, denied and
derided AS il is now, they went to war. q
! observe that highly respectable and
intelligent gentleman, Governor Hunt Of
New York, in a letter just publish, ed ,
speaks Of the Nebraska Bill as "bascd on
the absurd theory OF territorial sovereign.
ty." never heard man support that
measure or approve it for such u reason
Gov. Hunt has mistaken the sneers of lis
enemies !or the views Of its friends. The
Nebraska bill rests upon no such theory
upon no theory at all. but upon the stable
foundation Of the federal constitution, and Of
the natural RI ohts Of man,
know Of no one who claims sovereign
ty tor The Terri,orles. Al conccde their
dependence upon the United Slales.-
But within this relation, there are mutual
rights and duties, aud the qnestions-w hat
power may Congress lawfully exercise? and
are the people Of Territories Invested ofall
rig hts must be determined. not by poiti
co-me,aphysical considerations, arising out
of the attribute OF Sovereignty, but by the
constitution Of the United States To the
law, and to the testimony BY that con.
stitution. the general government is gov
ernmrnt, not only ofgranted, but. OF linz
TIED powers. and Congress can exercise no
authority which is rot given by the great
charter that brought it into existence. Let
any man put his finger upon the clause oil
that instrument which contcrs this power
Of internal interference, and lwil abandon
the principle. long as it has been cherished
by me. And that is many years, as will
appear by reference to the Globe 0: March
3lst, 1882, which contains an article writ
ten by me, and entitled, "A review Of the
opinion of Of 1.-The Supreme Court 10 the
Cherokee case"
In thai article observe, that the clause
G. the constitution authorizing Congress Ito
dispose of, and make all neediul rules and
regulations respecting the territory or 9TH
er property Of the United States, refers to
the territorial rights. and grants no jurisdic-
tion over persons. Among other things
l say: "The power to dispose of. aud
make needful rules and regulations respect
ing, the territory and other property ofthe
United States, and the power ia exercise
general jurisdiction over persons upon il,
are essentially different and independent.
The former is general and is given in the
clause referred to; the latter is special and
is found in another clause, and is confined
to the federal tract, (the District Of Colum-
bia.) and to places purchased by consent
Of the Legislature Of the State in which
the same shall be; for the erection Of forts.
magazines, arsenals, dockyards and other
needfuI Buildings" This is the same
doctrine subsequently, advocated, and more
fully developed, in my Nicholson letter.
repeat that this power Of internal legis-
lation cannot be found in the constitution,
and VAIN have been the efforts. by passing
into its service thousand aud one express
ions in that instrument, TO prove II to be
there; diversity of reference which, Of
itself, furnishes a strong presumption
against the authority, even it there were
no o.he, grounds Of objection.
Judge Mclean, OF the Supreme Court
Of the United States, in some considera-
tons published by him upon this subject.
and to which have e!sewh here referred,
remarked, that "there is no specific pow
err in the constitution which authorities
the organization Of territorial govern
menls. He adds: Ii this power be inn
piled from the spesifc, power to regulate
the disposition ofthe public lands, il must,
under the above rule, be limited to the
means suitable to the end in view. -IfCon.
gress go beyond this, in the organization
Of territorial government, they act with
out Limitation, aud may establish amonar-
chy. Admit that they may organize gov
eminent which shall protect the lands pu;-
chased and provided for the administration
Of Justice among the settlers, II does by no
means follow that they may establish slave.
ry," Judge Mclean here brings the con-
s.i,u,ion of the United States 10 the sup
por, Of the good old revolutionary doctrine,
.h.. ,h. r;oht IN establish colonies or ter