New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-12-22
serts I. an interruptions Slavery extending gill

buster.
Inc summing up Of an important phase Of the
Rouse debate is this, as admitted BY Mr.. Orr of
South Carolina, that there il q difference of
"oplniOn in the Democratic party a. to the proper
construction of the Nebraska bill upon the doe
trne Of squatter sovereignty"
Humphrey Marshall has been this Session. and
was last very acute and very industrious in pu<b-
ing The Democratic speakers into contradictions
and difficulties On this subject and, so far az tho
House goes, sseemed to be thought best to get rid
Of him. so far as possible, by making the admission
above quoted.
The one thing that habitualy impresses g., oh.
server, in noticing the course of debate and party
action and administrative conduct is that every.
thiDgn shaped by Southern leaders and hinges ca
Southern opinion. The Northern members Of the
Democratic party are siDgulsrly .hom of influence
and consideration. If anybody wishes to know
what line opinion is to take on any given political
question, OF what courses administration will fol-
low, the information sought can only be obtained
from Southern sources. An earnest man learns to
disregard the utterances of Northern Democrats in
Congress, from . habit he insensibly acquires of
believing that they are not the organs Of independ
ent but only Of reflected opinion. He sees that
they never thwart their Southern allies and act and
vote in constant Difference thereto. And as these
men from the North find Constituencies careless
enough or unintelligent enough to return either
them or their Like, think we may pretty safely
settle down in the opinion that, while the Union
continues the character of our legislation and Gov
eminent will depend, as it has depended, upon
what Southern leaders in Congress determine upon,
until the whole race Of Northern doughfsces is ex.
tinguished. When this will be, depends upon the
schOOlmaster.
But the most interesting proceedings of the week
have been the progress of the case in the Supreme
Court involving the consttutOnality of the inh-
biton Of Slavery in the territories. The case was
finished yesterday, after four days argument,
and closed by George T. Curtis, of Boston, who
confined himself to . consideration of the con-
structon of theterms of the grant to Congress to
dispose Of and make all needful rules and regu.
Citations respecting the territory and other pre-
"perty of the United States" Mr.. Curtis placed
himself on the position that this clause gave the
power in question, and confined himself strictly to
from its history and its terms. 1t was the effort
on the face of ii, ola praeticed lawyer who knew
law, believed in law and might not believe in much
else. Mr.. Curtis's argument was perhaps the
best to be delivered to the Court under the cir
cumstances. 1t being Of no use to address
majority of them on broad and elevated grounds,
it was wise to try and fastsn them to papable con.
stitutonal provision. can, therefore, well par.
don Mr.. Curtis for reserving all his compliments
for the Slave States, and never once offering to
bask his own or the Courts judicial rheunatics in
the sunshine of Freedom. won't mind their ap-
preaching the political Sloan on crutches, pro-
vided they Will only roll themselves in.
The position Of the Court on the question is quite
generally understood to BIZ this: Messrs. Curtis of
Massachusetts,, Nelson Of New-York, and Mclean
of Ohio, arc in favor Of the power. Messrs.
Campbell of Alabama, Wayne of Georgia, Daniel
Of Virginia, are against it. The Judges whose
position is not so well defined are understood to be
Grier of Pennsylvania, Catron of Tennessee, and
the Chief Justice fancy of Maryland. Thus it
may be seen that the division is geographical and
sectional; of the three Judges who hold the balance
of power, two live we'll up to the Ohio River and
Mason and Dixons Line. If they lived further
South the judgment Of the Court would be less in
doubt. But for the hostility Of the Shareholders,
we should have now on the Bench either Mr.. VIM.
B. Reed or Judge Woodward Of Pennsylvania, in
place of Grier, both of whom were nominated for
the place. the first named by John Tyler, and the
other by Polk, but both rejected for being unsound
on the negro question, and We should have had Mr..
Badger in the place Of Campbell, who, whatever
else be may be, is good 10 the law and sound on
constitutional Interpretation on the question low
under consideration.
If there had been anybody to do it, Reverdy
Jobnsens inconsistency in the case might have been
clearly shown up in the reply. lie avowed himself,
in the Senate in l847, as utterly hostile to the SEN
timents Of Mr.. Calhoun on the question of the per-
petuity Of Slavery, and its necessity as balance
wheel in the Government; declaring himself at that
time utterly opposed to the institution wishing to
get rid of it in Maryland, and saying it could not
exist hundred years. Yet, as have before stated
On this occasion, when he seemingly wished to per-
feet his ADHESION to the ruling dynasty, he did not
hesitate to declare his belief in the perpesuty OF
Slavery and in its necessity part of the essential
framework of the Government. Such are The JIM
Crow attitudes of our public men, South as well as
North, on this Slavery question. JSP.
THE SAME OLD QUESTION.
From Our Own Correspondent