Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1857-02-06

| have a right to quarrel with his logic,
no matter how much | may respect the
man; and when choose to find fault
with his logic, must claim the right to
express my surprise that he has not
shaped his reasoning to meet the crisis
which surrounded the constituency of us
both. He has gone out of the way to
find conclusions against them, when, by
following the well-beaten path of logical
deductions, he might have found ample
supplies to have reinforced those of them
who have been all tho time struggling to
maintain their equality with the other
great States of this Confederacy.
But my colleague, by way of laying
great stress on his Interpretation of the
Constitution in this respect, says, in that
same Hampden letter: ''On the contrary
the Constitution gives to Congress ex-
pressly the power to make all needful
rules and regulations respecting the ter
ritory and other property of the United
States" Ay, sir, is this SO? ask my
colleague to turn to that clause in the
Constitution and read it over again. 1t
says: THE Congress shall have power
to dispose Of and make all ncedful rules, !"
NC. Why did my colleague leave out
those words, dispose of?"- Why did
he, when he was making an argument as
constitutional lawyer, leave out these
words, significant and full of meaning as
they are? Who ever heard of the words
dispose of" being used to denote the
establishment of territorial government
Who ever supposed they were intended
to relate to political powers or political
rights in any sense whatever? Dispose
of government Why, sir, the idea
is absurd, ridiculous, incomprehensible
ask my colleague, then, why did he
leave out these words when he wrote and
published his Hampden letters? They
are the key to the text, and unveiI every
mystery that hangs around its construc-
ton.
But, sir, it is useless to argue this
question further. OF what avail is it
for gentlemen to argue against the de-
cision of the highest judicial tribunal in
the country? That question has been
distinctly settled by the Supreme Court
of the United States. That court has
said, in the case of the United States as.
Gratiot and others, 13th Curtis, p. SAT }
that the term territory" as used in this
clause of the Constitution, is simply de-
scriptive of one kind of property. and is
equivalent to the word Glands" The
term territory" used here is merely de-
scriptive of the character of the property
designated: And when Che gentleman
from Ohio Mr.. BINGHAM goes into an
elaborate argument, as he has done this
morning, upon the terms "rules and
regulations" as used in the Constitution
| turn him over to the decision of the
Supreme Court just referred to. But,
sir, ! care but little for the opinions of
Black Republicans. / care but little
about the opinions of Know-nothings. -
| care still less for the opinions Of men
who are following in the footsteps of
Hartford Convention disunionists.
Lord Coke says, "There are precedents
to be followed, and also precedents to be
avoided" and | choose to avoid, not
only the presidents, but the opinions
which such men may bring me. The
man who, in this enlightened age Of
American republicanism, would plant
himself upon such reasonable doctrines
as these. deserves no liberation at the
hands of the American people
Sir, my colleague says that he is sup
ported in his views Of the constitutions
ality Of the Missouri restriction by the
opinions and the judgmentof the immor-
tai William Pinkney; that Mr.. Pinkney
voted for the eighth section Of the Mis-
souri, compromise act, which contains the
slavery restriction and from this fact
my colleague infers that Mr.. Pinkney
advocated the constitutional right of Con-
gress to exclude slavery from the Terri
tories. But, sir, does not my colleague
know that the whole scope and purpose
Of Mr.. Pinkney's great speech on that
occasion was to show that Congress had
no constitutional power to impose such
restriction upon the people of the Terri
tory of Missouri, then asking for ad-
mission into the Union as State
The great argument used by him and
mostly relied on by him in that speech
was, that if Missouri came into the
Union as State at all, she had right
to come in as equal with each Of the
other States, and that Congress had con
sequently no right 10 impose terms and
conditions which would deprive her Of
that equality. The argument was, that
TO impose such restrictions would be like
manning State in the very act Of its
birth, making it cripple, blind and halt,
instead of giving it life, with all the full
powers and harmonious proportions Of
full-grown sovereignty. 1t is true that
Mr.. Pinkney voted for the eighth sec
ton, which was introduced as an amend
ment, and expressly intended to exclude
all the territory embraced within the
limits Of Missouri, and to apply only To
territory, then wild and uninhabited
region, where no white mans foot had
ever made its print, and no trace of
civilization had ever existed. To get
Missouri in as State Of the Union.
without the slavery restriction, was, in
his opinion, more than an equivalent for
nm imaginery line extending exclusively
over an uninhabited desert, which could
in no sense impair the constitutional
right Of self-government which the teach
ings Of our revolutionary struggles had
implanted so deeply ia the bosom of the
American people. There were no people
10 existence there 70 be aaested by that