The star of the north. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1849-1866, 1857-09-23

-
Tariff in iS46, and he could have induced
them to repent that great wrong on MIR. Dal-
las, as also their off repeated imputations up
on his own motives and conduct. He cer-
tainIy could have shown those who abused
myself and others, last spring, for agreeing
to modification Of the tariff when we had
no power LEFT to resis: II, ihst they were un-
reasonable in that complaint, or are now
mistaken in their support Of the distinguish
ed sdvocu,e Of "Bri,ish free trade" But let
that pass; we will leave the distinguished
advocate of free trsde In the embrace Of the
protectiouists, and the protec,ionists under
the leadership OF the distinguished free ira.
der. The new alliance only furnished an
other veri6ca,ion Of the homely sdase, that
political necessity. makes -silznsa bed tel
lows
But to the speech, ard viii give you ils
best sentiment first, so that his friends may
not complain. II reads as follows:
"I hold that under the Constitution of the
United States we have no right 10 NEEDLE
directly with the question Of Slavery in the
States where il already exists; it is State
institution, and can only be controlled by
State laws, and we in Pennsylvania have no
more righ, TO legislate for Virginia upon the
subject Of Slavery than Virginia has the right
10 legisIa.e for Pennsylvania on The subject
of our Public Schools. But in the territories
the question is different. The territories are
the common property Of the Union, aud we
have the common right to control them.
Then again, speaking of Slavery, be says:
"The question is no mere absirac,ion, nor is
il simply question OF right and wrong, a
question of morals; ii is a question Of vilsI
practical importance, which lies at the foun-
datiou or everything valuable 10 us as free
men,"
Touching the Dred Scot. decision he re-.
marks:
"And as am on this point, wish 10 say
that bow 10 the Dred Scott decision as a
matter of law. I raise no arm against the
law, and would never advise any one to
do so; but there is no law on earth which
can bind my reason or my conscience.
can, aud will think, and vote for what be-
lieve right" .....
Now let us consider the doctrines Of these
quotations for few minulep. In the first
he says we have ono righ, 10 medde with
Slavery in the States where il already ex.
ists," but that :'lhe Territories are the com.
r--r--.S--r .L>-Ir-:--,- - -L..~
the common right 10 control them. In The
second be presents the effects of Slavery as
"vi,al practical questions, involving every
thing valuable 10 US as free men," And in
the third he informs US that he "bows 10 The
Dred Scott decision as q matter OF law"
OF course agree that we have no right 10
interfere with Slavery in the States, but
Glowing 10 The Dred Scott decision" how
does Mr.. Wilmot propose TO reach the insli.
tuition in the Territories What becomes Of
the "common right" of the States 10 control
it's existence? How can thai right be brought
10 bear? That decision defines The Constilu.
tiou 10 mean that Congress has no right TO
lesislate on the subject for the Territories;
that Congressional interdiclion against its
extension is unconstitutional, and Mr.. vii.
mo, agrees that that decision is law; then
whei af his common right to, control il in
the Territories; and of the Hvial practical
questions" he has presented for our consider.
alton.
Now this is The point to which wish your
special attention. Though acknowledging
in his own peculiar phrase The binding ef-
feels of the decislOn of the Supreme Court,
Mr.. Wilmot is very careful TO control The
influence of that decision upon his position
and arguments; he has not told the people
frankly that by virtue OF the decision he so
reluctantly recognizes as binding, sla very in
a territory is almost as completely out Of the
reach OF the people of the government Of a
free State, as it is in the State of Virginia.
He dare not be explicit on this point; for he
would thereby illustrate the utter impractica.
bility Of his doctrines on the sub ject. In.
deed, his whole theory goes to pieces at this
point, and he must necessarily conceal as
much as possible, the effects of this decision,
or the deceptive character Of bis speeches
would become so transparent that he would
be obliged 10 abandon the discussion entire-
ly. \
Bowing 10 the Dred Scott decision as mat
ter of Law, it will not do to say only that
Pennsylvania has no mare right to legisale
for Virginia, on the subject Of Slavery, than
Virginia has TO legislate for Pennsylvania on
the subject of Public Schools" MIR. Will
mot cannot stop at This point; he must, and
does virtually agree BY that "bow" that
neither Pennsylvania nor Virginia has any
right to legislaie for Kansas or Nebraska, on
either subject and they have no power 10
interfere for or against the institutions Of the
Territories directly or indirectly. The CHI.
zens of each may 90 to Kansas, aud when
bona fide residents, they oan give effect to
their will. He or can do this; but as ci.i.
zsns Of this State we cannot infiusnce the
question in either Kansas or Virginia. Prior
10 the Dred Scott decision, The Republican
party contsndsd for The power of Congress