The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1857-03-27

~. and % the Ordinance had been establish-
Cd By the Sovereign States in their Sovereign
capacity, the first Congress, containing
RepresSuatives from those States, simply
recognised tho Ordinance.
This, - nearly - We can give it, was the
substance Of the statement Of tho Chief JUS
tios on this point. The practical inference
WIS, that the action Of Congress was mere.
~ exceptional, and cannot be quoted a q
precedent for similar exercise OF power in
any other case.
8. Whatever power Congress has TO &c
quire Territory, or to provide 1t temporary
government, was incident TO the power ex.
pressly granted in the Constitution to admit
new States. IL cannot acquire Territory for
the purpose Of governing 1t, as q colony, or
. provinoo-ths purpose il, and must be, to
form it into State, and only such legisla-
ton Is authorized as 10 necessary to that
end.
Itmay govern through council, or BY
authorizing the People to govern themselves
but IL Is not absolute, nor can II confer
absolute power. 1t cannot create an e.
tablishment Of relieion. pass laws abridging
the freedom ofspeech or Of the press, or the
right Of the people peaceably TO assemble
and petition for. . redress Of grievance
nor can it violate the rights Of property. The
citizen, the Constitution, the Government,
20 into the Territory together-the citizen,
with all his rights Of person and property,
the Constitution, spreading its guarantee
over them, the Federal Government, bound
to enforce them for their protection.
The right Of property in slaves Is equally
secured by tho Constitution with other
property rights. No matter what 1t may be
considered by the Law Of Nations, that Law
cannot come between tho citizen holding
slaves, and the Federal Constitution, which
recognizes and guarantees them as property.
And If the Federal Government is restrained
from legislating 20 as to violate it much
more any Territorial Government eminat-
ing from its will. Until the Territory be-
comes State, the right Of property IN slaves
therein cannot be interfered with.
1. II follows that the law of Congress
prohibiting Slavery north Of 36' 80, com.
monty known as the Missouri Compromise,
was null and void, because it transcribed
the powers Of Congress, and was violation
of the rights Of property.
REMARKS.
We need hardly say that the opinions ol
Chief Justice fancy sanction all the dogma
put forth ut any time by the most extreme
advocates of slavery. They recognise slav
cry rs supreme, Freedom ~ subordinate
Slavery as fundamental Law Of the Unior
Property in Man fundamental Idea o
the Constitution.
They deny the Power Of Congress, mt
they deny the power Of any Territorial Gov
eminent to interfere with the right to holt
slaves in q Territory. while they assert tn
duty OF the Federal Government to inter
pose against any obstruction sought to b
thrown IN the way of its exercise.
Thonk God, these Opinions are not ye
law, and let us hope for the honor, ant
peace, and well.being Of the Country, tina
they may never become law. As II is, thei
utterancc by the Chief Justice, with the en-
dorsement, II is believed, by q majority y
the Bench. has given blow to the reputa
ton of the Court, from which it cannot re
cover 30 long US it shall remain as now con
: stituted. The legal mind ofthe country vii
not assent to novel and monstrous doctrines
unsustained by argument or authority: an,
the people will revolt ut views repugnant L
humanity and the great principles Of Chris
tian civilization.
JUDGE NELSON.
Judge Nelson next read paper in which
he discussed the question, whether Dret
Scott was exempt from Slavery in Missouri
after having been returned from Illinois
whittier he had been carried by his master
He argued the negative, on the ground that
q State has the rightto determine for itsel
the status of its inhabitants, and is no
bound to recognize any foreign jurisdiction
any further than il pleases. Under tho leg
islation Of Illinois, bred Scott, sojourninI
in that State, might become free-but If re
turned to Missouri, the servile condition
might again attach to him. without detri
ment to the rights Of lllinois-Missouri wa
not bound within her limits TO give force "a
the Laws Of Illinois operating on his status
Such was the decision Of the Supreme Cour
of Missouri, and that the decision was bind
ing.
The questions relating to the Ordinance
Of 1857, the power Of Congress over Terri.
tory, and the Missouri Compromise, wer,
not discussed by the Judge, and no opinion
was expressed concerning them. So far al
he, Judge from the State of New York
was concerned, the views on those subject,
which prevail in the free States, and which
have determined to great extent the legis
lation Of the country since 1857, was lef,
without word in exposition or support.
JUDGE CATRON.
Judge Catron followed with on Opinion
in which he announced his entire concur
renee with Judge Nelson in relation to th
particular point discussed by him.
He then examined the question, Did Dire,
Scott. his wife and child, acquire their free
dom by sojourn in the territory north of So
80, in virtue Of the Missouri Compromise
He argued the negative, discussing in tn
course Of his argument tho whole question
of the power OF CongreR over Territory
lie held that the Ordinance of 1887, pro
hibiting slavery, was within the power, o
the States enactiDg it-that, by the Fedora
Constitution, IL became binding on the new
Government, like the other engagements O
the fourth article Of tho Constitution. grant
ing power to Congress to make all needfu
rules and regulations respecting territory
&C., did not apply alone to tho tcrritor,
northwest of the Ohio. but invests Congress
with the power to govern tho Territories o.
the United States. II is due to myself, h,
remarked, to say that 1t is asking much o
a judge, who has for nearly twenty year,
been exercising jurisdiction from the West
ern Missouri line to the Rocky Mountains
and, on this understanding Of the Constitu
ton, inaicting the extreme penalty Of death
for crimes committed where the direct legis
lation Of Congress was the only rule, e
agree that he had been oil the while acting
in mistake, and rs an usurper.
This remark doubtless was suggested BY
the novel assumption Of Chief Justice III.
ney, that the third section of the fourth ar
ticle Of the Constitution had no applica
ton to any other than the Northwest Ter
ritory.
The Judge proceeded to ay that the only
question then was, as to the limit Of the
power to govern Territories. The Ordinanc,
restrained n in relation tn the NOythwos,