Bedford inquirer and chronicle. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1854-1857, 1856-12-12

10 10 this is d mere .auliily; il takes awai
no right. it conssrs none. IF 10 remains on
3 the statute book uilrepealei, it remain,
there cnlg as a lnenulnent Of error, aud .
beacon OF warning to tie legisiatorfand tl.,
statesman. To repeal il will be only Il
remove impeffeetion fretn the statutes, with,
ont atfeetings either ID the sense Of per,
nlission Or .of prohibit,en, the action Of III.
I sotates, orof lAeir citizess.
4 Still, when the nominal restriction Of thi,
nature, already dead letter il law, was il
terms Iepealea By the last Congress, in d
clause ofihe act organizing the Territorir,
~ hansas aud Nebraska, that repeal vas
'nade the occasion of vide -spread an.
dangeroils agitation.
] l. was alleged tn4t the original enactment
being a colnRacrof psfpc3 u! lncrai obIi-
gatiOn, It's repeal constituted an odious
breach q faith.
/ Anact Of Congress, while it remains
pnrepeaIed, more especially if il be consti-
tutionally valid in the Judgment Of those
pdbiis fnuctienaries whose duty it is to pro-
nounee on that point, is undoubtedly bind
/ ing oa The conscience Of eaca good citizen
Of the Republic. But in What sense can il
be asserted that the cnsetneutia question,
was Invested With perpetuity and entitled
70 the respect of a solemn compaet' be.
tween whom was the coupaet2 No dis incl
contenaing powers Ct the government, no
separate sections Q! the Uaioa, treating as
such, entered into treaty s:ipulatiois on the
subject. 1t was a mere clause OF an act Of
Congress. and Ike any other controversies
matter Of legislation, received lis finai shape
and was passed b. compromise OF the con
fiictng opinions or sentiments Of the mem.
oers Of Congress. Bdt ii il lad moral au-
thority over meas coaseienses, 10 whom did
ihis authority attacHa Not to those Of lie
North, who had repeatedly @fuscd to COM
fi'ni it BY extension, aud whg hai zealonsly j
siriven 10 establish other and Incompatible
regulations upon tho suajegs And Il, a.
It thus appears, the supposed compact had
no obligatory force as to the North, OF
course it could not have lad any as to the
South, for all such compae,s must be mutual
and Of reciprocal Obligation.
a
Il has not uulfsqueutly happened iaat
iaw- giyers, With undue estimation Of the
value Of he i,w they give. OF in The view Of
'mpartng 10 It pecu.iar stfeugtii, nuke it
perpetual IN terms; but obey cannot thus
Uind the conscIence, ibe Judgment, and the
wall OF these who may succeed them, investeu
With similar responsibilities, aud clothed
with equal authority. More careful investt
CATION may prove tne las TO be aasoaud IA
principle. Experience may SHOW il to be
ihipertectln detail and lnipracticable IN
execution. Aud then boih reason aud right
cotibiae not merely to Justify, bur 10 require
as repeal.
Tue Constitution, supreme as it is over
aII the departments OF the governments leg
IsiatiFe, executive, ani judicial, is open 10
Amendment iy Its very terms; af.i Congress
or the States may, IN their discretion, pro-
pose ameudnient 10 il, solemn compact
though il truth is between the sovereign
States of the Uaioo. La tie epreSent instance,
i political euactmen;, which had ceased to
haye legal power or authority of any kind,
was repealed. The position assumed, that
Congress had no moral righ, to enact. such
repeal, was strange enough, and singularly
80 IN view Of the fact that the argument
came from those who openly refused obe-
dience'to existing laws Of the land, having
the same popular desiglption and quality
as2sDmpronlse acts--nay, more, who uu-
eq'sieocally dsSregardcd aud dcondem,ed the
most positive and ohliga tory iisi4nctions OF
the Consiitution Itself, and soeght, BY every
means within their reach, to deprive portion
of their felloweitizens OF the equal enjoyment
of those rights and privileges guaranteed
alike to all by the fundamental compact Of
cur Uuion.
This argument against the repeal of the
statute line IN question, was accompanied
BY another of uongeuial character, aud
eqaally with the furuler destitute of foun-
dation in reason and truth.
Of course, these iiDpntaticns on the IN.
,entions Of Congress in this respect, con-
iceived as they were IN prejudice. and dis
senlinated ia passion, are utterly oosiitute Of
any Justification in the nature Of things and
contrary to all the fundamental doctrines
aud principles of civil liberty and self gov
ernnient
While therefore, in general. the people
OF the northern States have never, ut any
rhine, arregated for the federal government
the power TO interfere directly with the do
messic condition Of persons III the sou thern
States, bnt on the contrary have disayowed
all such intcniions. and have shrnhk from