Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1856-12-04


" as a monument "f error. aud beacon Of war
ming to the legislator and the Statesman To re
peal il will be only to remove impertecton from
the statues without affecting, either in the sense
of permission or OF prohibition, b. action OF the
States or of their citizens.
Still when the nominal restriction OF this ma
ture already dead letter IN law, was IN terms
repealed by the last Congress. IN clause OF The
act organizing the Territories Of Kansas and Ne
braska. that repeal was made the occasion OF a
wide spread and dangerous agitation. i
1t was alleged thai the original enactment be
ing A compact Of perpetual moral obligation its
repeal constituted an odious breach Of faith.
An act of Congress white it remains unrepeal=
ed, mere especially if it be consttutionally valid
in the judgment of those public dictionaries
whose duty il is TO pronounce on the point. l. nn
donhtedy binding on the conscience of each good
citizen Of the Republic. But in what sense can
il be asserted that the enactment III question was
invested with perpetnity and entitled 10 the res
peot of solemn compact Between whom was
the oompacR No distinct contendng powers
of the government. ne separate sections OF the
Union, treating as such entered into treaty silrn
lations on the subject. II was n mere clause "i
an act of Congress and like any other contfo.
verified matter Of legislation, received MS NUM-
shape and was passed by compromise OF The con
hiciing opinions or sentiments oi the members oi
mems consconces, 10 whom did this authority
attach Not TO those of the North. who bad re
peatedly refused to confirm IT by extension aud
who had zeaously striyen to establish other aud
incompatible regulations upon the subject. Aud
iCas il thus appearsthe supposed compact lad 10
obligatory force as 10 the North, of course II
could not have had any as TO The South. for all
such compec,s must be mutual and Of rec .pto-
cal obligation.
1t has not unfrcluently happened that law Civ
frs. with undue estimation oi the yaiue Of tho law
they give or in the view of importing 10 It pc
ouar strength make il perpetual in terms; but
they cannot Tins bind the conscience, tho jadg
ment and The will Of those who may succeed
them. invested with similnr responsibilities, mud
clothed with equal authority. More careful IN
sosfigation may prove tho law 10 be unsound IN
principle Experience may show it 10 be imper
feci in detail aud mpracticahle in execution
And then both reason and right combine not
merely 10 justify, but 10 require lis repeal.
The Constitution, supreme us II is over all the
departments Of The government, legislatiye,exeo.
tive, and judicial, is hprn 10 amendment by its
very terms, and Congress or the States may, in
their discretion. propose amendment il. solemn
compact though il in truth is between the sover
eign States Oft Union In the present instance
a political enactment, which I'D ceased IL have
lecul power or authority Of any kind was repeal
moral right To enaci snch repeal. was strange
ne1gh and siugularly SO in view Of the fact that
tn argument came from those WIZ openly re-
"a, cd obedience to existing laws ofthe land, hav-
inE the snme popular designation aud quality us
acts, nay more, who uncgulYocally
aud condemned the most positive and
obljgat, ~ iniuneiens OF the Constitution Itself,
nud sought, by every meens within ihelr rrnch,
TO deprive portion Of then fellow citileus of the
IN
guaranteed aliketo all by the fundamental CON.
pact Of our Union.
This argument against the repeal OF the statute
line in question, was accompanied by another Of
cnugonia character. and equally with the former
destitute II foundation IN reason aud truth. 1t
was imputed that the measure originated III the
conception of extending the limits of slave labor
beyond those previously assigned 10 it, md that
such was its natural Us well rs intended effect;
and these baseloss assumptions were made, in
the Northern States. the ground of nnceasing as
sault upon constitutional right.
The repeal in terms Of II statute, which was
already Obsolete, and also null for unconstituton-
atty. could have no influence to obsruct or 10
promote the propagation of conflicting views #
political or social Institution. When the net
organizing the Territories of Kansas and \ bras
ka was passed, the inherent effect upon that por-
ton of the public domain ,hos opened to legal
settlement was to admit settlers from ali the
States of the Union alike, epch with his cunNie-
tous Of public policy aud private interest thero
tofuuna III their discretion. subject 10 such H.
mutations as the Ceustitat'n und nets Of Con
eress might prescribe new States, hercalter- 10
be admitted into the Onion. II was FREQ 6rlI,
open alike 10 all, whether the statute line Of AS
sumed restriction were repealed or not. That
repeal did not open 10 free competition ot tie
diverse opinions and domestic institutions licl,
which. without such repeal. would have been clio
scd against them; il found that field Of oompoll-
ton already opened in fact and in law. Al
the repeai did was to relieve the siatue-hoek
of an Objectionable enactment, unconstitutional
in effect, and injurious in terms TO large
portion Of the States.
l. the fact. that. in all the unsettled regions
of the United States, if emigration bee lett free TO
act IN this respect for itself. without legal pro-
hihitions on either side, slave labor will .nona-
heousy 20 everywhere, in preference of ire la
Dor! Is It the tgct, that the peculiar domestic in
stitutions Of the Southern States possess relative
ly so much of yigor, that, wheresoevrr ma ayen-
ne is freely open 81 all the world, they will pene-
trgte TO the exclusion Of those of the Northern
States! l. it the fact, tina, the former enjoy com
pared with the latter, such irressthy superior
vitality, indepen lent Of climate soil and all other
accidental circumstances, Ms IL be able to pro
duce the Supposed resultn spite OF the assumed
moral aud natural obstacles 10 its accomplish
meat and e the more numerous population OF
tkr Northern Statesl
ihe argument Of those. who advocate the Gu
artm"ut NJ new laws Of restriction; aud condemn
the repeal at old ones. in affect AYERS that their
| eriicular views Of government have no self cx-
tending or self sustaining power of their own
aud "ill 80 whore unless forced by act OF Con
5ress. And ifCongress do but pause for mo.
rnent in the policy of stern ooercion if it venture
10 try the experiment of leaving men 10 judge
fer themselves what institutions will best suit
them; If it be not strained up to perpetual legis.
latve exertion on this point; if Congress proceed
thus to act in the very spirit of liberty. it is n,