Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1857-01-06

charge the democratic party as being the advocates
Of slavery extension. The democracy Of the coun-
try, "a party, neither advocate the extension of
the institution nor its prohibition but have PLAN
ted themselves upon the great principles of nom
Intervention by Congress, and Of the right of the
people to govern themselves, and that each seps-
rate political community should determine the ques-
ton for ITSELF For one, STAKEHOLDER as | am, with
all my sympathies and interests with that section
where slavery exists, do not desire to see the
institution established in any section or country
against the wishes of the people residing therein.
Well sir, let as look at another provision of that
Kansas bill. In the twenty. fourth section it is
provided that
"The legislative power of the Territory shall
extend to all nghtful subjects Of legislation con-
sistent with the constitution of the United States
and the provisions of this act; but no law shall be
passed interfering with the primary disposal of the
soil; tax shall be imposed upon the property of
the I'm ted States nor shall the lands or other pro-
perty Of non residents be taxed higher than the
lands or other property of residents"
Here you have recognition of the legislative
power Of that territory. To what does it extend2
To all the rightful acts of legislation. You recog-
Mise it when you say that Congress has the power
to legslste upon it, and should prohibit it. It is
an act Of legislation we all admit, at some time or
other, by the people of that Territory for the ma
king of a constitution itself is but another mode
of enacting laws, and is therefore legislation.
Then under this clause of the Kansas bill, what
limitations are there upon the legislature OF Kan
sss2--for you must bear in mind that what the
the legislature does, it does by the authority CT
the people who elected them. What are the linn
itatlons2 The constitution of the United States
and the provisions of the Kansas bill.
Mr.. a. Marshall 1 wish to ascertain if uu-
derstand the gentleman's position. Am l to uu-
derstand him as taking the ground that, under the
twenty.fourth section, just read, Congress has the
right to delegate the people of Territory the
right to exclude slavery?
Mr.. Jones, of Tennessee. I am not here to an
swer questions.
Mr.. H. Marshall But I want to know if that
is the gentlemsns position.
NJ Jones, of Tennessee I will say that I do not
believe that Congress has any power to delegate
As said before, the territorial laws in my Opin-
ion, receive their vitality from the assent implied
or expressed, of the people under them
Mr. b. Marshall And not from Congress.
Mr. Jones, of Tennessee Here, then, is this
provision Of the bill in reference to the legislative
power Of that territory. It is copy, word for
word, and letter for letter, of the Utah and New
Mexico bills of 1864 part Of the compromise
measures Of that year. and that very clause SUPER
seeded the necessity Of touching the Missouri Com
promise, in my opinion, in the Kansas bill. The
constitution Of the United States does not pro.
hibt the people of the territory of Kansas from
introducing slavery; nor did the Kansas bill pro
hibt them. Then, If neither the constitution nor
this act organizing the teritOry-and which would
| become vital when the people should give their
| assent to 1t by organizing government under it
prohibited its introduction by the people of
Kansas through territorial action, your Missouri
Compromise was not in the way, in my opinion,
because the prohibition is not to be found either
| in the constitution or the Kansas ACT
Mr.. H Marshall Will the gentleman allow me
to make one remsrk2
Mr.. Jones, of Tennessee. Hope the gentle
man from Kentucky will not interrupt me- said
nothing to him during the delivery of bis speech,
and | DO not wish to be cstechised on this occa-
sion.
Mr.. q. Marshall do not propose to catechse
| the gentleman. The gentleman did me injustice,
and 1 merely wished to make a remark to set the
matter right.
| Mr.. Jones, Of Tennessee. It was not my inten.
| ton to do the gentleman Injustice, and if have
| yield for correction.
Mr.. d. Marshsll. l stated in my remarks the
other day, and l now state this proposition: | said
| that the Uah and New Mexico bills gave vitali-
ty to the legislatures of these territories upon the
| express ratification of Congress but that the Kan.
sas and Nebraska bi fails to DO that in this par
tiCusr. Ia the sixteenth section think it is it
interpOIstes instead of the will OF Congress to
give the territorial legislation vitality the doctrine
Of squatter sovereignty, which denounCe
Mr. jones' Of Tenn essee. l ask the gentleman
whether he does not endorse the Utah and New
Mexico bills?
Mr. H. Marshall. do
Mr.. Jones, Ct Tennessee. l then ask the gen
man whether ne denies the right and power, upon
the part of the people of the territories of Utah
or New Mexico, to repeal the law of Mexico pro-
bibItIDU 8 avery t1Oaa tarrit1rIFCT
Mr.. H. Marshall. If the gentlemen wishes me
To answer l say that I hold the doctrine. that
when that bill delegates to the people of this ter
ritOry tho power and right to legislste upon al
righ,ful subjects Of legislation under the consttu.
uOn It reserves to Congress the right to supervise
their legislation, and hat the legislature does not
contain within Itself the elements of vitality.
Mr.. Jones, Of Tennessee. | understood the
gentleman to deny what he was pleased to call
sqEauer sovereignty. now q K, him agan if the
people Of these territories were to repeal any law
either Of this government or Of any foreign o "
eminent which may be supposed to be in force in
that territory, either prohibiting slavery or intro
duCug It there, would be rise here in bis place as
reprea entatiVe upon this floor, and vote to over.
rule the action OF the people upon this s1bjscR
Mr.. d. Marshall Ny proposition certainly gees
to that extent.
Mr.. Jones, Of Tennessee l say to the gentle.
man, that II Tue people OF Kansas, or any other
Terrtgry Of the United States, organized as a DO.
htical community now, should ia their legislative
capacity establish or prohibit slavery, I, for one
will not vote to repeal their act or declare void
what the Legislature Of the Territory with the
sanction Of the people, have done in the exercise
Of their rights. Now, sir say that the whole
democratic party subscribe as understand it to
the principle OF the Kansas and Nebraska bill that
the Legislature Of Territory-the legislative DOW
er Of TerrtOry-shaL extend to all rightful SUBJ
jects of legislation, consistent with the consttu-
ton OF the United States and the principles of that
bill We may differ as to what is constitutional
power, but we do not propose that this Congress
shall revise Whist the people there may do on the
subject. There IS another tribunal to which the
democratic party s willing that this question, when
it arises shall 60 for decision But there is auoth.
er feature of the Kansas.Nebrssks bill which I
regard as merely declsrstory of what were the in
teutiOls Of those who passed the bill. l refer to
that part of the thirty second section which reads
as follows:
THAT the constitution, and laws of the United
States which are not locally insppicsbe, shall have
the same force and effect within the said Terrific
~ of Kansas as elsewhere in the United States.
except the eighth section Of the act preparatory
to the admission of Missouri into the Union. az.
proved March sixth, eighteen hundred and twenty;
which being Inconsistent with the principle of nom
Intervention by Congress with slavery in the ates
and Territories, as recognised by the legislation of
eighteen hundred and fifty, commonly called the |
compromise measures, is hereby declared inepers-
tive and void; it being the true intent and mean !