Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1856-01-24

tVAlOJ CtOSI Ntsiu va isi ''tViNuAdt ~, w =
upon ali 4diniepend entS States. Once
more the constitution and Uuion tri- (
umphsd signally. The new Teuito-
ries were organized without restric-
tioas on the disputed point, and were /
thus left TO Judge in that particular for
themselves; and the sense of consti-
tutiolal faith proved vigorous enough
in Congress not only to accomplish
this primary object, but also the Incl
dental and hirdly less important one,
ofso amending the provisions of the
statute for the extradition of fdgitives
from service, as to place that public
.duty under the safeguard of tbs gem
eral government, and thus relieve
from obstacles rtisedup by the leg
iSation of some of the States.
Vain decl4mations regarding the
provisions Of law for the eX idition
offugitiTes from service, with occa-
sionM episodes of frantic effort to OBJ
struct their execution by riot and
murder, continued, for a brief time,
to agitate certain localities. But the
true principle, of leaving each State
and Territory to regulate its own laws
of labor, according to its own sense OF
right and expediency, had acquired
fast hold of the public judgment to
such a degree, that, by common con-
sent, it was observed in the organl-
z1tion Of the Territory of Washing
ton.
When more recently, it became
requisite to organize the Territories
of Nebraska aud Kansas, it was the
natural and legitimate, if not the IN
evitable consequences OF previous
events and legislation, that the same
great and sound principle, which had
already been applied to Utah and
New Mexico should apply to them
that they should stand exempt from
the res rictions proposed in the act
relaiive to the State of Missouri.
These restrictions were, in the
estimation Of many thoughtful men
null from the beginning, unauthorized
by the constitution, contrary to tht
treaty stipulations for the cessiOn o
Louisiana, aud inconsistent with tbt
equality of the State.
They had been stripped ofall NOR
al authority, by persistent efforts t.
procure their indirect appeal though
contradictory enactments. They
had been practically abrogated by
the legislation attending the organl
cation of Utah, New Mexico an(
Washington. If any vitality re
NAMED in them, it would have beer
taken away, in effect, by the new ter
ritorial acts, in the form original!
proposed to the Senate at the frs
session Of the last Congress. It wa.
manly and ingenious as well as pa
triotie and just, to do this directl.
and plainly, and thus relieve the stat
ute book Of an act, which might b
of possible future injury, but of n
possible future benefit; and the meas
ure of its repeal was the final consu
nation and complete recognition Q
the principle, that no portion of th
United States shall undertake
through assumption of the powers Q
the general government, to dictat
the social institutions, of any othe
portion.
The scope and effect Of the Ian
guage of repeal we're not left in doub
1t was declared, in terms, TO be 18th
true intent and meaning Of this &C
not to legislate slavery into any Ter
ritory or State, nor to exclude i
therefrom, but to leave the peopl
thereof perfectly free to form an
regulate their domestic institution
10 their own way, subject only to th
constitution of the United States
The measure could not be with
stood upon its merits alone. 1t wa
attacked with violence, on the falls
or delusive pretext, that it couslitu
ted breach Of faith Never was oh
lection more utterly destitute ofsub
stantial justification. When, be
fore, was it imagined by sensibl
men, that regulative or declarativ'
statute, whether enacted ten or fort,
years ago, is irrepealable- that al
act of Congress is above the consti
tuition?
If, indeed there we're in the fact
any cause to impute bad faith, i
would attach to those only, who have
never ceased, from the time of th'
enactment Of the restrictive provis
ion to the present day, to denounc'
and TO condemn it; who have con
stanlly refused to complete it b.
lonlStafIOn