Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1856-12-04
,opsciepces to whom did this authority attach?


ly refused to confirm it by extension, and who
had zealously striven to establish other and
incompatible regulations upon the subject.-
And if, as it thus appears, the supposed COM
pact had no obligatory force as to the North,
of course it could not have had any as to the
South, for all such eompacts must be mutual
and of reciprocal obligation.
1t has not unfrequently happened that law
givers, with undue estimation of the value OF
the law they give, or in the view of imparting
to it peculiar strength, make it perpetual in
terms but they cannot thus bind the con-
science, the judgment and the will OF those
who may succeed them invested with similar
responsibilities and clothed with equal authori-
ty. More careful investigation may prove the
law to be unsound in principle. Experience
may show it to be imperfect in detail and i'm
practicable in execution. And then both rea-
son and right combine not merely to justify,
but to require its repeal.
The Constitution, supreme as it is over all
the departments of the Government, legisla-
tive, executive and judicial, is open to amend
ment by its very terms ;; and Congress or the
States may in their discretion, propose amend
ment to it, solemn compact though it in truth
is between the sovereign States of the Union.
In the present instance, political enactment,
which had ceased to have legal power or au-
thority of any kind, was repealed. The po-
sition assumed, that Congress had no moral
right to enact such repeal, was strange enough,
and singularly in view of the fact that the ar
gument came from those who openly refused
obedience to existing laws of the land, having
the same popular designation and quality as
compromise acts-nay, more, who unequivocal-
ly dsregarded and condemned the most posi-
tive and obligatory njunctions of the Consti-
tuition itself, and sought, by every means with
in their reach, to deprive portion of their fcl-
low-ctizens of the equal enjoyment of those
rights and privileges guaranteed alike to all 10y
the fundamental compact of our Union.
| This argument against the repeal of the
statute line in question, was accompanied by
another of congenial character, and equally
with the former destitute of foundation in rea-
son and truth. 1t was imputed that the mea-
sure originated in the conception of extending
the limits of Slave-labor beyond those recent
ly assigned to it, and that such was its natu-
raj as well as intended effect and these base
less assumptions were made, in the Northern
States, the ground of unceasing assault upon
constitutional right.
dy obsolete, and also null for unconstitutional
| ty could have no influence to Obstruct or to
promote the propagation of conflicting views
of political or social institution. When the
act organizing the Territories of Kansas and
Nebraska was passed, the inherent effect upou
that portion of the public domain thus opened
to legal settlement was to admit settlers from
all the States of the Union alike, each with
his convictions of public policy and private in
terest, there to found in their discretion, sub
ject to such limitations as the Constitution and
acts of Congress might prescribe, new States,
hereafter to be admitted into the Union
| 1t was free field, open alike to ALL whe-
ther the statute line of assumed restriction were
repealed or not. That repeal did not open to
free competition of the diverse opinions and
domestic institutions field, which, without
such repeal, would have been closed against
them it found that field of competition al
ready opened, in fact and in law. All the re-
peal did was to relieve the statute-book of an
Objectionable enactment, unconstitutional in
effect, and injurious in terms to large por-
tion of the States
Is it the fact, that, in all the unsettled re-
gions of the United States, if emigration be
left free to act in this respect for ITSELF with
out legal prohibitions on either side, slave la
Dor would spontaneously 60 everywhere, in
preference to free labor? Is it the fact. that
the peculiar domestic institutions of the Sou
thern States possess relatively so much of vi
gor, that, wheresOever an avenue is freely open
to all the world, they will penetrate to the ex-
cluSion of those of the Northern States Is
it the fact, that the former enjoy, compared
with the latter, such irresstbly superior vital-
ty, independent of climate, soil, and all other
accidental circumstances, as to be able to pro-
duce the supposed result, in spite of the as
sumed moral and natural obstacles to its ac
complishment, aud of the more numerous popu
lation of the Northern States
The argument of those who advocate the
enactment of new laws of restriction and con-
denim the repeal of old ones, in effect AYERS their
particular views of government have no self
extending or self-sustaining power of their
own, and will go nowhere unless forced by act
of Congress. And if Congress do but pause
for moment in the policy of stern coercion :;
if it venture to try the experiment of leaving
me n to judge for themselves what institutions
will best suit them if it be not strained up
to perpetual legislative exertion on this point :;
if Congress proceed thus to act in a very spi-
rit of liberty, it is at once charged with aim
ing to extend slave labor into all the new Ter
ritories of the United States
Of course, these imputations on the inten-
tions of Congress in this respect conceived as
they were in prejudice, and disseminated in
passion, are utterly destitute of any justfca-
tion in the nature Of things, and contrary to
all the fundamental doctrines and principles
of civil liberty and sefgovernment.
While therefore, in general, the people of
the Northern States have never, at any time,
arrogated for the federal government the pow
er to interfere directly with the domestic condi-
ton of persons in the Southern States, but on
the contrary have disavowed all such intentions,
and have shruuk from cOnsnicuOuS affiation