The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1857-03-11

the power to legisate over the Territories With
tue words Ito make all needful rules and regula :.
uons respecting the territory. are coupled the
words and other property of the United States. {"
AND the concluding words render this construct ion
rresstibie "and nothing in this constitution shall
ns 30 construed as to prejudice any claims of the
Unted states or any particular State"
1t is obvious that the Congress- under the new
government, regarded the above clause as ueces-
sary to carry into effect the principles and provis
ions OF the ordinance of 1887, which they regarded
as an act of the States in the exercise of their po
iitica power at the time and these
OF the same States under the new government
did not think proper to depart from any essential
principle and did not attempt to undo anything
that was done.
As to territory acquired without the limits of
the United States, It remains territory until ad-
mitted into the Union. No power is given in the
constitution to acquire territory to be held and
governed In that character and, consequently,
there cannot be found in the constitution any def
milton ef power which Congress may lawfully ex.
ercse before 1t becomes a State. The power to
acquire territory until it is In a condition to be-
come State on an equal footing with the other
states must necessarily rest on sound discretion
ana II becomes the duty Of the government to ad-
minister the laws of the United States for the
protection of personal rights and property there,
Whatever territory Is acquired is for the common
oenens OF the people of the United States, which
is put trustee. At the time that territory was
oo.ainea from France it contained no population
10 De admitted as State, and it therefore became
necessary 10 hoid possession of it until settled ard
naol'ed by civilized community, capable of
sen government and for admission into the Union
nu. as we before said, it acquired By the fed.
GRAZ government as the representative and trustee
OF the people Of the United States and must be
held for their common and equal benefit for IL was
the acquisition Of the people of the United Sta,es
acting through their agents, and government held
IL Tor the common benefit until 1t should become
associated Is member of the Union Unti that
time arrived 1t was undoubtedly necessary that
some government be established to protect the in
haoitants their persons and property. The power
- acquire carries with the power to preserve The
Iorm Vi government necessarily rests ON the dis
cretion OF Congress 1t IL their duty to establish
the best suited for the United States, aud that
must depend on the number of its Inhabitants and
the character and situation of the territory
What government is the best must depend on the
condition OF the territory At the time to be con,
tinued until 1t shalt become State But there
can never be mere discretionary power over
persons and property. These are plainly defined
by the Constitution The Constitution provides
that Congress shall make DO law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom Of
speech, or of the press; or of the right of the
people peaceably to assemble and to petition the
government for . redress of grievances" &C.
Thus the rights of property are united with the
personal rights and this extends to the territories
~ we'll as to the States. Congress cannot author
Zs the territories to do what it cannot do itself; it
cannot confer on the territories power to violate
the provisions of the constitution.
Its.ems however, that there Is supposed to be
q difference between slaves and other property.
The people, in the formation of the constitution,
delegated to the general government certain
enumerated powers, and forbade the exercise Of
others. 1t has no powers over persons and pro
perty of citizens except those enumerated in the
constitution, If the constitution recognises the
right of master and slave and makes no difference
between slaves and other property, no tribunal
acting under the authority of the United States
C an draw such distinction and deny the provisions
aud guarantees secured against the encroachment
of the government. AS we have already said the
right of property in slave is expressly cOnferrei
in the constitution, and guaranteed to every State
This Is in language too plain to be misunderstood;
and no words found in the constitution giving
Congress greater power over slaves than over any
other description of property.
1t is, therefore the opinion OF this Court that the
act of Congress which prohibits citizens from hold
ing property of this character North of a certain
line is not warranted by the constitution and ia
one of his family were made free by their resi-.
deuce in Illinois. The plaintiff was not citizen
of Missouri. but was still slave, and therefore
had no rgh. to sue in Court of the United States
The Co.rt, having thus examined the case as II
stands under the constitution, proceeded to other
points saying, as Scott was slave when he
bro ght back Missouri from Illinois, h. under
the law OF the former and not of the latter. 1t la.
been settled by the CHEST tribunals that ndivid
ui does not acquire his eedon under such circum-
stances Asit appears to the Court that the PLAIN
tiff s not citizen Ct alssouri, citizen of the
United States who could sue in the United States
Cou Is this Court can give no judgment ana hence
the suit must be dismissed for ant of jurisdiston.
Associate Justice Nelson stated the giounds 4
which hs had arrived at the conelusen that the
sument OF the Court below must be affirmed Hav-
ing stated the case substantially as above, he pro-
seeded 70 examine it 9 merits The question
was, Whistler the removal of the plaintiff, with his
master, to Illinois, with view to temporary resi-
dencs, after his return to Missouri, was such
residence in free State as worked emancipation -
tie maintained that it did not such questions be
longed the States to cecide for themselves As to
whether Missouri will recognize give effect to he
lava of Illinois the subject Of slavery, Is for Mis-
souri, herself TO determine nor There any constlLu-
tonei power II. htfuiy to coutrol her. Every state
or nation possess exclusive sovereignty and jurs-
dction within her own territory, and her laws affect
and bnd ell property within her limits No State or
nation can affect bind persons or property ouslhe
of her territory. The question 10 faIly established
that it belongs TO the sovereign State Of mssou to
determine the question OF slavery within her own
jurisdiction, subject only to such limitations as may
found in ths constitution This the result OF the
independent and sovereign character OF tue state
1t equaiiy applicable to the other States belonging
to the Confedsacy. IL must be admitted that Con
sress posses power TO create or abolish slsysry
STATE ana if Congress possesses power under tha
constitution to abolish slavery in the Territories,
necessarily possess the power to establish IT.
rh1s he denied and then TO shew that the
question involved in the now before the court,
was ono depending solely the law of Missouri,
concluding with remark that the Judgment of the
Court below should be affirmed.
Associate Justice Catron also stated the history OF
ths case. said that If the Court hso power TO
decide the question further thsn to dlsms, 1t, it
mad nossieht to discuss ls meris but he beld that
the Court usdiclon to decide the merits of the
case, which he proceeded to examine Ii wes now
too late to question the power to govern the Terri
tories as nsiPient States, and ht them for adn1is
sion. The only question wns how tar the power Of
Congress is limited as to the northwest territory
Virginia had the right to abolish slavery there, aad
did ao ny en- agreement IN 1877, with tue other
states; but this did Lot prevent new etstes being
admitted with or without slavery. Subsequently
North Carona and Georgia ceded their lands for the
common benefit, and Congress had NO more power
egate slavery out of those eessons than 1t had
egislate slavery In the territory north of the Ohio
There was no power TO iegsiate slavery In either
case The Inhabitants stood protected after a. they
did before the cessons were made. In Louissua
slavery not only lawful, but was most valuable
Az the date of the treaty the inhabitants were left
free to enjoy their property, freedom and liberty,
and were to be protected therein until they csme
inio the Union as a State. The Missouri line Of
SS so was act of aggression. Cons gress cannot
do indirectly what 1t caunot perform directly.
III Southern man cannot go TO the Terrific
riss with his slaves 1t follows that . North. m
fsrmer or mechanic cannot bring with him his
implenena of toll lfConeren could prohibit
any species Of lawful property throughout Louisi.na
when it was acquired, so tt could exclude all de-
scrptions Of property The rsht ts esisIate In the
Territories depends on the contrast OF cession His
opinion was that third article of the treaty by
irAds Auds tect ted hv