The Hillsdale standard. [volume] (Hillsdale, Mich.) 1851-1909, 1857-06-09
4HILLSDALE, MICH. TUESDAY, JUNE g. 1857

Y
jurisdiction in the former.
g. II the court revcrses judgment upon
the ground that il appears by particular
part Of the record that tho circuit court had
not jurisdiction il does not take away tho ju-
risdiction Of this court to examine into and
correct, by n reversal of tho judgment, any
other errors, either as TO tho jurisdiction or
any other matter, where it appears from 9TH
or parts Of the record that the circuit court
had fallen into error On the contrary, it is
the daily and familiar practice of this court
to reverse on several grounds, where moro
than one error appears to have been commit
ted. And the error of a circuit court in its
jurisdiction stands on the same ground, and
it is to lie treated in the same manner rs any
other error upon which its judgment is found
ed.
Z. The decision, therefore, that the judg-
ment of this circuit court upon the plea in
abatement is erroneous, is no reason why the
alleged error apparent in the exception should
not Also be examined. and the judgment re-
vcrsed on that ground also, il it discloscs a
want of jurisdiction in the circuit court.
8. 1t is often the duty of this cotirt, after
having decided that particular decision of
the circuit court was erroneous, to examine
into other alleged errors, and to correct them
if they are found to exists. And that has
been uniformly done by this court, when the
questions arc in any degree connected with
controversy, and the silence of the court
might create doubts which would lead to fur.
ther and useless litigation.
III.
I. The facts upon which the plaintiff rules
did not give him his freedom, and make him
citizen of Missouri.
2. The clause in the Constitution author
izng Congress to make all needful rules and
regulations for the government of the terrific
ry and other property of the United States,
applies only to territory within tho chartered
limits of some one of the States when they
were colonies Of Great Britain, and which
were surrendered by the British government
TO the old Confederate of the State, in the
treaty of peace. 1t does not apply to terri
tory acquired by tho present federal govern
mcnt, by treaty or conquest from foreign
nation.
The case Of the American and Ocean In
surancc Companies agt. Canter Peters,
2lD referred to and exarlincd, showing that
the decision in this case is not in conflict with
that opinion, and that the Court did not, in
tho case referred to, decide upon the construc-
tion of the clause of the Constitution above
mentioned, because the case before them did
not make it necessary to decide the question.
3. The United States, under the present
Constitution, cannot acquire territory to be
held as colony, to be governed at its will
and pleasure. But it may acquire territory
which, at the time has not population that
fits it to become State, and may govern it
as territory until it has n population which,
in the judgement of Congress, entities it to
be admitted as a State of the Union.
4. During the time it remains territory,
Congress may legislate over it within the
scope Of its constitutional powers in relation
to citizens of the United States-and may
establish a territorial govenmcnt-and the
form of this local Government must be regu-
lated by the discretion of Congrcss-but with
powers not exceeding those which Congress
ITSELF by the Constitution, is authorized to
exercise over citizens of the United States,
in respect to their rights of persons or rights
of property.
l. The territory thus acquired, is acquired
by the people of Tho United States for their
common and equal benefit, through their
agents and trustees, the Federal Government.
Congress can exercise no power over the
rights of persons or property of a citizen in
the territory which is prohibited by the Con-
stitution. The government and the citizens,
whenever tho territory is open to settlement,
both enter it with their respective rights de-
fined and limited by the Constitution.
2. Congress have no right TO prohibit the
citizens of any particular State or States from
taking up their homo there, while it permits
citizens of other States to do so. Nor has it
right to give privileges to one class of citi-
zens which it refuses to another. The terri
tory is acquired for their equal and common
bcnefit-and if open TO any, it must be open
to all upon equal and the same terms.
8. Every citizen has right to take with
him into the territory any article of property
which the Constitution of the United States
recognizes as property.
a. The Constitution of the United States
recognizes slaves as property, and pledges
the Federal government TO protect it. And
SonSTcbs CdunOI cAcTCisc any nioIc uuluoTiAs
over property of that description than it may
constitutionally exercise over property of any
other kind.
5. The act Of Congress, therefore, prohibit
ing citizen Of the United States from ia
king with him his slaves when he removes to
the Territory in question to reside, is an ex-
ercise Of authority over private property which
is not warranted by the Consttution-and
the removal Of the plaintiff, by his owner, to
that Territory, gave him no title to freedom.
V.
1. The plaintiff himself acquired no title
to freedom by being taken by bis owner, to
Rock Island, in Illinois, and brought back
TO Missouri. This Court has heretofore de-
eided that the status or condition of person
of African descent, depended on the laws Of
the State in which he resided.
2. It has been settled by the decisions Of tho
highest Court in Missouri, that, by the laws
Of that State, a slave docs not become enti-
tied TO his freedom where the owner takes