Sauk Rapids frontierman. [volume] (Sauk Rapids, M.T. [i.e. Minn.]) 1855-1860, 1856-02-07

IN 8 ssgs gs@
gress, not sonly AZ ccemplish thl
preliminary object but also DE incidens
tal and hardly - Important one. a ssa
amending he prop oasitions ofthe assuts
An lhe axlradstion u fagitives sfrosI Ser
vice, as q that public duty sndsr the
safeguard Of the general government.
md fkGs relieye Il from i II obsiacies rais-
simply the legislation of some Of the
States.
Vain defamation regarding the pro-
visions of law for The extsadition Of fu-
giitives from service. With occasional
episodes Or fanatic efforts to obstruct
their exeeutionlby riot o. murder, con-
tinued for A brief time 70 agitate sertain
localities. But the true principle Of
leaving each State to regulate it, own
laws Of labor according toits own sense
of right and expedisncy, had acquired
fast hold upon the public judgment to
such q degree that BY common consent
i was observed in the organizations q
the Territory. Of Washing Ton:
s4sA ssT
When, more recently It beoame re-
Gaisite TO organize the two Territories
Of Kansas and Nebraska, It was the
natural and legitimate, II not the merit
able consequece Of previous events and
Legislation, that the same great and
sound principle which had already been
applied to Utah and New Mexico, sho ID
be applied 70 them, ard they stand exr
empt fem the restrictions provided IN
tbs. act relative to. the State Of. Missouri.
These restrictions were in fhe estima-
|tion Of many thoughtful men, null from
the beginning, authorized by the Con-
|stitution, contrary to the treaty stipula-
tions for the cession Of Louisiana, and
inconsistent with the equality Of the
States. They had been stripped Of all
moral authority BY persistent efforts to
procure their indirect repeal through
contradictory enactments.
They had been particularly abrogated
BY the legislation attending the organi-
cation Of Utah, New Mexico and Wash.
Iington. # any vitality remained il
would have been taken away in the eff
fleet Of new territorial acts, in the form
Originally proposed in the Senate at the
first session Of the last Congress i
Twas manly and glorious, as well as pat
[riotic and just, to do this directly and
plainly, and thus relieve the statute
books Of an act which might be of flu
Iture possible injury, and that of no pos.
|sible future benefit and the measure Q
litsiuturs repeal was the final consum
II Is < 4 S 4 a n
nation and complete recognition Of thu
! principle that there can be no assump
ton Of the powers Of the General Gov
Iernment to dictate the social institution:
! Of any portion Of the country.
The scope and effect Of the Language
of reneal was not lei: in doubt. It wa
declared, in terms, to be the true inten
and meaning Of this act not 10 iegislat,
slavery into any State or Territory, no
Ito exclude It therefrom, but to leave tn
people perfectly free to form and regu
late their domestic institutions in thei
own way, subject only to the constitution
| Of the United States. The measure
| could not be withstood on it's merit
Il alone It was attacked with violence o.
the false pretext that it constituted
breach Of faith. Never was objection
made SO utterly destitute of substantial
Justification. When before was it i'm
agined by sensible men, that regula
tive or declarative statue, whethe
enacted ten or forty years ago, is ire
lpealable that an act Of Congress
!, labove the Constitution I
!, If indeed there were in The act an
cause. to imagine it, it would attach onl
} to those who have never ceased frol
the time Of the enactment Of the re.
Z trictiye provisions to denounce and col
! denn i by the needfnl supplement
: any legislation who have again an
again attempted its repeal by the enac
ment Of incompatible provisions, al