Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1857-07-30
NEW SERIES, VOL. I, NO 81
Republicans believe

duty to exclude it. Republicans believe
and many Democrats, SO called. profess tc
believe Slavery wrong, aud are prompt tt
declare that if in Territory they would
oppose its Introduc ton. To be consistent
they should be as ready when performing
their constitutional dety of presenting 4
!, form of government for Territory to pro-
vide AGAINST the introduction OF an admitted
evil among those who are to go there, al
they would against Its admission into theil
own local community. man who would
guard his own locality against Slavery as q
pest to society, and who refuses when in
his power to guard an infant community
committed Temporarily % his charge against
the same pest, shows that he is governed
r wholly by selfish motives. This is precise.
" the condition of all these self-styled Dem
ocrats who, while advocating the powers oi
Congress over the Territories and profess
ing 10 abhor Slavery, will do nothing 10
prevent its expansion. The denial OF the
power is of very recent origin. 1t is not
only expressly given, as has been shown,
by the Constitution, but it has been always
acted upon and is sanctioned to the fullest
extent by the former decisions of the Su-
preme Court of the United States.
In the case Of the American Insurance
Company against Carter Pet. 542). that
Court in discussing the power of Congress
over the Territory of Florida, before il be-
came State, said:
SIN the mean time Florida continues 10
be Territory of the United States, gov
erned by that clause of the Constitution
which empowers Congress to make all need
ful rules and regulations respecting the ter
rito-y or other property of the United States.
Perhaps the power Of governing Territory
belonging to the United States, which has
not by becoming State acquired the means
Of self-government, may result necessarily
from the fact that it is not within the Juris-
diction of any particular State, and is within
the power and jurisdiction of the United
States. The right TO govern may be the
inevitable consequence o! the right to ac-
quire territory Whichever may be the
source from which the power is derived the
possession of il is unquestionable."
In another part of their opinion in the
same case, the Court say, ain legislating
for them (the TerritOries) Congress exer-
cises the combined powers of the General
and State Governments" This was the
language of the Supreme Court of the Uni
ted States when it was presided over b.
Marshall, who wrote the opinion. 1t is full
and conclusive as 10 the power of Congress
over the Territories. That was the ques-
ton before the Court. They investigated
it fully, laid down the general rule that
Congress possesses the comb ined powers OF
the General and State Governments in leg
islating for Territories, and decided that in
exercising that power Congress had author
ity to establish Territorial Courts in Florida
of different character from those required
| bv the Constitution to be established IN the
States Many other decisions OF the Su-
| preme Court. aud of different State Courts
might be cited to the same effect, and i'll
any question under the Constitution could
be regarded as settled beyond dispute in
| 1854, it was that OF the power of Congress
to legislate for and govern the Territories.
1t possessed this power to the same extent
as State in the establishment of courts;
it must possess it also to the same extent
in the exclusion OF Slavery, unless there is
something in the Constitution of the United
States allowing its exercise in the one case
and denying it in the other; bnt 10 such
clause can be founG. That instrument con-
;ains no provision establishing Slavery; ifI
it did, Slavery would be universal through
out the Republic, and there would be equally
lack OF power 10 prohibit it in State as
in Territory. With plain provision of
the Constitution, the practice of the Gov
ernment under it for more than sixty years,
and the decisions of the Judicial tribunals
of the country all in its favor, it would seem
that the Republican creed asserting the
power Congress over the Territories,
and to exclude Slavery therefrom, rested
upon foundation which could never be
shaken, more especially as under this inter-
pretation of the Constitution, the United
States had gone on peacefully settling Ter
ritory after Territory, and adding State after
State to the Republic, till the number had
more than doubled; the population, wealth
and resources of the country increased many
fold, and when it was in the full tide of
prosperity, advancing with rapid strides in
all the elements which contribute to the
greatness of a nation and add to the happi-
ness and renown of its people. But in 1854
a new policy was inaugurated, and since
then a new Interpretation has been given
to the Constitution, and these are the cause
of all the woe which has since befallen the
country, and now threatens with destruction
the best and fairest system of government
constructed by human hands. The depart
ure from the former policy of the Govern
ment in 1854, consisted in the repeal of the
Missouri Compromise, whereby the Terri
tories of Kansas and Nebraska were opened
to Slavery, although in consideration of the
admission of Missouri into the Union as
slave State, they had, in 1920, been set
apart for Freedom. The Northern pretense
under which the Missouri Compromise was
repealed is now abandoned. We no longer
hear its repeal justified on the ground that
it was necessary in order to establish the
principle of Territorial selfgovernmen., or
to enable the people of Territory to regu-
late the subject of Slavery for themselves,
through their Territorial Legislature.
The advocates of the repeal now insist
that The people while in Territorial con-
dition, have no right TO exclude Slavery,
but that, in the formation of a State Con-
stitulion. they viii. possess that right. The
repeal, therefore, conferred no additional
right upon the people of the Territory, for
it 10 clear that the Missouri Comp promise
would not have prevented an exclusion of
Slavery BY the people in the formation of
their State Government. The only effect,
therefore, of its repeal was to open Kansas
and Nebraska while Territories to Slavery,
and not to confer upon the people of those
. Territories any great principle of self.gov-
ernment or anything else except Slavery.
; MIR. Buchanan tells US IN his inaugral
message that il il of but little practical i'm