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

| Tarlh 10 l64b, ana ne couiu nave iuouooo
! them 10 repent that great wrong on Mr.. Dal'
las, as also their oft repeated imputalions up
on his own motives and conduct. He Ger.
tainly could hsve shown those who abused
myself and others, last spring, for agreeing
to molifcation Of the tariff when we had
no power left to rssis; II, that they were an.
reasonable In that complaint, or are now
mistaken in their support Of the distinguish.
ed sdvoca,e of"Bri,ish free trade" But lei
that pass; we will leave the distinguished
advocate Of free ,fsde In the embrace Of the
protectionists, and the pro,eclionisis undeI
the leadership Of the distinguished free ira
der. The new alliance only furnished an
other verRca,ion Of ,he, hoaely adsse, tina,
lows.
But to the speech, and Twill Eve you its
best sentiment first, so That bis 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 it 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 legeIaie for Pennsylvania on the subject
of our Public Schools. But in the territories
The question is different. The territories are
the common psoper,y of the Union, and we
have the common right TO control them.
Then again. speaking of Slavery, he says:
"The question is no mere abstraction, nor is
il simply question OF righ. and wrong. a
question of morals; it is aaaas!ion of vital
practical importance, whisSsfe allhe foun-
dation or everything valuable 10 Us as free
men,"
Touching the Dred Scott 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. 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"
Nov let us consider the doctrines of these
! quotations for a few minutes. In the frs
he says we have emo right to meddle with
Slavery in the States where il already ex.
lists" but that "the Territories are The com.
NOR property of the Eninn. aani spxs have
the common right 10 control them. In the
second be presents the effects Of Slavery al
"vi,al practical questions, involving every
thing valuable 10 us as free men," And il
the third he informs us that he SHOWS 10 the
Dred Scott decision as a matter Of law"
OF course agree that we have no right 10
interfere with Slavery in the States, bu
"bowing to the Dred Scott decision, }" how
does Mr.. Wilmot propose TO reach the insti
tuition in the Territories What becomes o.
the s'common right" of the States 10 contro
It's existences How can that right be brought
10 bear? That decision defines the Constilu
lion 10 mean that Congres has no right te
egislate on the subject for the Territories
that Congressional inierdction against ii,
extension is unconstitutional, and Mr.. Viii
mot agrees that that decisjas.is Law; ther
what q his common right to control il II
the Territories; and of the "vital practica
questions" he has presented for our consider
alton.
/ Nov this is The point to which I wish you
special attention. Though acknowledging
in his own peculiar phrase the binding ef
fects Of the decision Of the Supreme Court
Mr.. Wilmot is very careful 10 control th'
! influence of that decision upon bis position
and arguments; he has not told the peopl,
frankly that by virtue Of the decision he 8,
reluctantly recognizes as binding, slavery /,
a territory is almost as completely out Of th'
: reach Of the people of the government Of {
free State, as il is in the State of Virginia -
He dare not be explicit on this point for h,
would thereby illustrate the utter impractica
bili,y Of his doctrines on the sub ject. In
deed, bis whole theory goes 10 pieces at lhi
. point, and he must necessarily conceal Al
much as possible, the efiscF Of this decision
or the deceptive character of his speeche
would become so transparent that he woul'
be obliged 10 abandon the discussion entire
ly.
Il Bowing TO the Dred Scott decision as mat
ter of law, it will not do 4 say only tina
"Pennsylvania has no mareright TO legislaIe
for Virginia, on the subjectEo Slavery, thar
Virginia has 10 legislate for Pennsylvania or
the subject Of Public Schools" MIR. Viii
{ mot cannot stop at this poiti; he must, ane
, does virtually agree BY that show" tha
, neither Pennsylvania nor'virginia has any
f right 10 legislaie for Kansas or Nebraska, or
} either sub ject end they have no power is
, interfere for OF against theinsiituiious Of the
, Territories difectly o indirectly. The cili
, zsns Of each may go \. Kansas, aud wher
5 bona fide residents, they cen give effect ts
, their will. He or can do ,hR; but as citi
zens Of this State we 'csnups influence The
question in either Kansas q Virginia. Prio
, 10 the Dred Scott deoisiond the Republican
party commended for the p,wer OF Congress
!, over the subject in the Territories; but tha
3 decision has settled theIquestion agains
] them, and has closed the Ial channel through
1 which the free States couIE reach the ques