The Richmond palladium., 1856-12-04

OoL WHICH otltlupteu "LaN iC"
willing te do directly, that is TO act
aggressiyely against the constitutional rights oil
nearly one hali of the thirty-one States
In the long series Of acts Of indirect aggression
the hrst was the strenuous agitation, by citizens
OF the NertherE States. in Congress ard out OF IT,
Of the question Of negro emancipation in the
Southern States
The second step in this path of evil consisted
OF acts Of the people Of the Northern States and
ia several instances Of their governments, aimed 10
facilitate the escape Of persons held 10 service in
the Southern States, and 10 prevent their extra
dtion when reclaimed according to law and in
virtue of cypress provisions of The Constitution
10 promote This object, legislative enactmcnfs
snd other means were adopted TO take away or
defeat nights which the Constitution solemnIy
guaranteed. Ia order to nulhfy lac then exiting
act of Congress concerning the extradition OF ia
gitircs koH s-ryice, laws were enacted III many
STATES fofbiddirg their officers aIder the cTeres
pcIa'tiJs 10 participate in the execution Of any
act Of Congress whatever IL this AZ, tha. s}s-
tem Of harmonious cooperation between the
authorities Of the United States aad of the several
81 ses for the IaaiD Denarcc OF their common nsti
tut0ns which existed in the early wears of the
itepEbhc, destroyed; conflicts OF Jurisdiction
10 be frequent; and Congress found itself
compelled, for the support of The Constitution
and the vndiCatIon OF It's power, to authorize tie
appointment of new officers charged with the exc
cuton of Ifs acts if they and the officers of The
States were the ministers, respectively, of foreign
governments IN state of mutual hostility, rather
than fellow magistrates OF common country
peacefully subsistDg under the protection Of one
well-eonstitu.ed Union. Thus, here also, aggres-
sion followed by reaction; and the attacks
upon the Constitution at this point did but
10 raise up new barriers for its deflEce and seca-
rity.
The third stage of this unhappy sectional coz
trsyersy was in connection with The organization
of territorial governments and the admission Of
new States into the Union. " hen it was pro-
posed 10 admit the State of Maine, by separation
Of territory from that of Massachusetts and tac
State Of Missouri formed Of portion CT the ter
ritory ccded sy France to the United States, rep
resentatives in Congress objected 10 the admission
eff the latter unless with conditions suited to par
ticutar views Of public policy. The imposition Of
such condition successfully resisted Bat
at the same period the question was presented of
imposing restrictions upon the residue of territory
ccded By France. That question was for the
time, Disposed Of by the adoption of i geograpLi-
cal line Of limitation.
ic this connection, It should not be forgotten
that France, Of her own accord resolved for Goa
siderntiOns Of the NEST farsighte1 sagacity, 10
cede Louisiana to the rted States and that ac-
cesson accepted by the United States the
latter expressly engaging that the inhabitants If
the ceded territory shal. be Incorporated in Il &
Union Of tie Usited States and admitted as soon
possible. according To the principles Of
the Federal Constitution, 10 the enjoyment Of all
the rights. advantages and iunmuuities of the ri,l-
nens q the United States; aad il tAe '-----'';'e
they re't nc marnfrrieu and prote ctod III the free
er Joy acEt OF their liberty property and the reli-
giou which they profess is 10 say, While i;
remains in territorial coalition, its inhabitants
maintained and protected in the free enjoy
ment OF their liberty and property, with right
then to pass into the condition of States, on
footing of perfect equality with tie original
States.
The enactment, which established tie restrict
i've geographical line, acquiesced in rather
than approved by the States of the Union. 1t
stood on the statute book however, Ior number
of years, and the people OF the respective States
aouuiesceG in the re-enactnent of the principles
applied to the State Of Texas and il was pro-
posed to aequiesce in its further application to
the territory acquired by the United States from
Mexico, But this proposition successfully
resisted By tue representatives from the orthern
states, who regardless of the statute line, insist
ed upon applying restriction TO the territory
generally, whether wing nerth south Of it,
thereby repeating it a legislative compromise,
and. the part Of the North, persistently vie'at
ing the compact, ii compact there vas.
There pom this enactment ceased TO have bind
ing virtue in any sense, whether respects the
North the South; and SO. in effect, il
treated the occasion Of the admission OF the
State Of California, and the organization of the
Territories Of New Mexico, utan and Washing
ton.
Such was the state OF this question when the
time arrived for the organization of the Terrific
ries Of X ansas ADD Nebraska In the progress of
constitutional inquiry and reflection 1t had COW
at length come to be clear = that Congress
does not possess constitutional power 10 impose
restrictions OF this character upon any preseut
intufe State of TIE L Mon. In long series of
decisions on the fullest argument, and after the
most deliberate consideration, the Supreme Court
of the [ nired States had finally determined this
roint ia every form under which the question
could arise. whether affecting public private
rishtS--in questions of The public domain, OF reh-
eion, Of navigation and Of - ryitude
The several States Of the Union are. by force of
the Constitution co equal in domestic legislative
power, Congress cannot change a law of domes
tic relation in the State of Maine no more
il in tie State OF Missouri. ANY statute which
proposes TO do this is uullity; it takes
away no right it copterS none. If it remains on
the statute boek Hnrepea!ed, il remains there only
as a monument OF error, and beacon of warning
to the legislator ard the statesman. To repeal il
will be only to imperfectiou from the sta
tutes without affecting, either in the of per
mission or Of prohibition the action of the StsteS
or of their citizens.
Still when the nominal restriction OF this nature,
already dead letter in law, in terms repealed
by the last Congress in a clause OF the act organ
iziug The Territories of Kansas and Nebraska that
repeal a rs made the occasion OF wide suread
and dangerous agitation.
Ii was alleged that the original enactmcu; being
a contract Of perpetual moral obligation, It's repeal
constituted an odouS breach or faith.
An act Of Congress while il remains unrepealed
more especially if it be constitutionaiy vailed IN
the Judgment of those public functcra-jos whose
6aty il i TO pronounce th4t point, i uudoubred
" binding on the conscience OF each good citizen
OF the Republic. But in what sense il be
asserted that tire enactment in question was inveS-
ted with pernetuty and eatitsed TO the respect Of
u solemn corr,paotf Between whom was the COM
pact? No distinct conteu,Sing powers ef the
government no separate sections Of the Union,
treating as such catered into treaty stipniatioas
on the subject 1t q mere clause Of az act
of Congress and ike sny other controvertel mat
ter OF legislation, received it, fRa shape asd was
L - -. .....-