The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1856-12-03


penalties. 10 participate In the execution Of any
act of Congress whatever In this way that
sx.tem of harmonious operation between
the authorities Of the United States and Of the
vcral States for the maintenance Of their common
Institutions. which existed In the early years Of
the Republic, was Destroyed conflicts Of jurisdic.
ton came to be frequent, and Congress found II.
self compelled, for the support Of the Constitution
and the vindcation Of its power, 70 authorize the
appointment of new officers charged with the
execution OF Its acts, ~ u 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 coun
try, peacefully subsisting under the protection Of
one well constituted Union. Thus here, also, AZ.
gression WAS followed by reaction; and the attacks
upon the Constitution 1t this point did but serve
to raise up new barriers tor Its defence and secu.
rily.
The third stage of this unhappy sectional con
troversy was In connexion with the organization
OF territorial governments, and the admission of
new States into the Union. When 1t was proposed
to admit the State o. Maine, by separation Of ter
ritory from that of Massachusetts,, and the State
Of Missouri formed portion Of the territory &C.
ded by France to the United States, represents
tives in Congress objected to the admission of the
latter, unless with conditions suited to particular
views of public policy. The imposition of such
condition was successfully resisted. But, at the
the same period, the question was presented of
imposing restrictions upon the residue of the terri
tory ceded by France That question was, for the
time, disposed of by the adoption of geographical
line of limitation.
In this connexion It should not be forgotten that
France, OF her own accord resolved for considera.
tons OF the most farsighted sagacty, to eede Lou
siana to the United States and that accession was
accepted by the United States the latter expressly
engaged that 1.-THE inhabitants of the ceded terrific
ry shall be incorporated In the Union of the United
to the principles of the Federal Constitution to the
enjoyment of all the rights. advantages, and i'm.
munities of citizens of the United States; aud in
the meantime they shall be maintained and protec.
ted in the free enjoyment of their liberty PROPERTY
and the religion which they profess"-that is to
say, while it remains in = territorial condition, its
inhabitants fare maintained and protected in the
free enjoyment of their liberty and property, with
right then to pass into the condition of States on
footing of perfect equality with the original
States.
The enactment which established the restrict.
i've geographical line was acquiesced in rather
than approved by the States of the Union. 1t
stood on the statute book, however, for q number
OF years; and the people of the respective States
acquiesced in the reenactment of the principle
as applied to the State of Texas; and il was pro.
posed to acquesce in its further application the
territory acquired by the United States from Mex
leo Butt this proposition was successfully resisted
by the representatives from the northern States,
who regardless of the statute line, insisted upon
applying restriction to the new territory gene.
rally, whether lying north or south of it, thereby
| repeating it as a legislative compromise, and on
the part Of the North, persstently violating the
compact, If compact there was.
Thereupon this enactment ceased to have bind.
ing virtue in any sense, whether as respects the
North or the South; and 80 in effect it treated
on the occasion of the admission of the State of
California, and the organization of the Terrific
| ries of New Mexico, Utah and Washington.
Such was the state OF this question, when the
time arrived for the organization of the Territories
of Kansas and Nebraska. In the progress of con-
IL -
length come to be clearly that Congress does
not possess constitutional power to impose re.
| strcuons of this character upon any present or
| future State Of the Union. In long series of
decisions, on the fullest argument, and after the
most deliberate consideration, the Supreme Court
of the United States had finally determined this
| point, in every form under which the question
could arise, whether affecting public private
| rights-in questions of the public domain, of re-
| lgion, of naviga ion and of servitude.
The several States of the Union are, by force of
the Constitution. co equal in domestic legislative
power. Congress cannot change a law of domestic
relation in the State of Maine; more can it In
tho State of Missouri. Any statute which propo
sos to do this is mere nullity it takes away no
right it corners none. lift remains the statute
book unrepealed, it remains there only As . monu-
ment of error; and . beacon of warning to the 10
gislator and the statesman. To repeal it will be
only to remove imperfecton from the statutes,
without affecting either in the of permission
or of prohibition, the action of the States, or of
their citizens
Still when the nominal restriction of this nature
already dead letter in law, WAS in terms repealed
by the last Congress- in clause of the act organi.
znG the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska, that
repeal was made the occasion of a wide spread and
dangerous agitation.
Itwas alleged that the original enactment being
compact OF perpetual moral obligation, its repeal
constituted an odious breach of faith.
An act of Congress, W bile it remains unrepealed,
more especially if it be cOnstitutonally valid in
the Judgment of those public functionaries whose
duty it is to pronounce that point is undoubtsd.
y binding the conscience of each good citizen of
the Republic. But in what sense can it be assert
ed that the enactment in question was invested
with perpetuity and entitled to the respect of
lemn compact Between whom was the compact!
No distinct contending powers Of the government,
separate sections of the Union, treating such,
entered Into treaty stipulations the subject. 1t
was mere clause of an act of Congress, and like
any other contrOverted matter of legislation, re.
ceived its final shape and was passed by compro-
mise of the conflicting opinions or sentiments of
the members of Congress. But if it had moral
authority over mems condolences, to whom did this
authority attach Not to those of the North, who
had repeatedly refu sed to confirm it by extension
and who had zealously striveD to establish other
andincompatible regulations upon the SUBJECT
And if, as it thus appears, the supposed compact
had no obligatory force to the North, of course
it could not have had any to the South. tor all
such compacts must be mutual and of reciprocal
obligation
Ithas not unfrequently happened that law Civ.
ers, with undue estimation Of the value of the law
they give or in the view of mpartng to peculiar
strength, make it perpetual in terms; but they can
not thus bind the conscience the judgment, aud the
will of those who may succeed them,' invested
with similar responsibilities and clothed with equal
authority. More careful in vestigation may prove
the law to be unsound in principle. Experience
may show it to be imperfect to detail and impract.
cable in execution. And then both reason 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, legislative, exc
cutve and judicial is open to amendment by its
very terms; and Congress or the States may, in
their discretion, propose amendment to it, solemn
compact though it in truth is between the soye
reign States of the Union. In the present in
stance, political enactment which had ceased to
have legal power or authority of any kind, was re-
pealed. The position assumed that Congress had
no moral right to enact such repeal, was strange
enough, and singularly in view of the fact that
the argument came from those who openly re.
fused obedience to existing laws of the land hav.
ing the same popular designation and equality as
compromising acts-nay, more who unequivocally
disregarded aud condemned the most positive and
obligatory iDjunctions of the Constitution ITSELF
and sought, by every means within their reach, to
deprive portion of their fellow.citizens of the
N al or tnft rir