St. Charles City Republican intelligencer. [volume] (St. Charles City [Charles City], Iowa) 1857-1861, 1858-09-02


ment was to be tested, and it remains
to he seen whether we will abandon
that great principle which furnished
at once the hope Of our patriot sires,
and in being deprived Of domestic
Legislation, one of their prominent
causes of complaint recitcd in the
Declaration of Independence.
/, for one, will never abandon the
principle nor cease to contend for its
faithful application, not only to the
people of the States but to the peo-
pie of the Territories.
But, fellow citizens, we have fallen
upon times when political organiza-
ton not only glories in striking a por-
ton of the constellation of stars rep
resenting the states of this Union
from their banners, but when they
narrow craftsmanship and political
economy down to a single idea, such
as you have heard Mr.. Vandever dis
cuss this afternoon. Accordingly, to
the leaders of modern Republicanism
there is but one subject of Legitimate
legislation before the people of the
United States-that is slavery. This
is, in my Judgment, mistaken notion.
We have other subjects of practical
legislation in which the people Of this
District feel more direct interest than
in the slavery agitation. Rail Roads,
Mail routes, Post Offices, Revenue,
Public Lands, improvement Of Rivers
and Harbors, and multitude Of other
matters. But all Of these matters of
needful legislation arc sacrificed to
the agitation of the niger question,
and are forced to yield to the consid-
Grafton of an impracticable theory.
For my part, asking to represent a
white constituency, hope, If elected,
to represent you in Congress, to leg
islate and devote myself to the ad.
vancement of your material interests,
and, in subjects Of national legisla.
ton, to legislate for the whole thirty,
two States. Cheers.
l do not believe that the time OF
Congress and the whole country should
be taken up with the discussion of a
mere theory, and yet as long as the
opponents of the Democratic party as
sail no other position of the Democra.
cy than Popular Sovereignty" in its
application to the territories, we must
meet them upon that issue. This is
the only question rendered in this cam
paign the only proposition which
the Republican candidate ventures to
discuss and this must be my apollo
gy for devoting particular attention to
the consideration of the question as
to how shall the Territories be gov
erned.
Now, to understand properly this
question, we must consider the nature
of the Government of the United
States, and the powers and duties OF
its several departments. Let me say,
then, this Government is one of GER
tain specific and enumerated powers,
granted by the people, by and in the
constitution, and that no department
of the government can exercise more
power than is clearly designated in
that Constitution. Whatever the peo
pie intended Congress or any Other
Department of the Government to ex
: ercise is plainly set forth in the Con
stitution, and in framing that instru
ment the people emphatically declared
that all powers not therein delegated
are reserved to themselves.
have always understood that this
government was q government of Ger
tain limited, enumerated, and restricted
poacers. and that all the powers which
L.--. L~... -5eI~ I'D :. AZ .f6". Ja72 n rt
freely exercised but that they courd
exercise no other power than that
which was delegated to them by the
people. Congress as one Of the co6r,
dinate Departments of the govern.
ment is entrusted with the Legislative
duties and powers of the government,
but these duties and powers extend nc
farther than the people, through the
Constitution of the United States, have
prescribed. The legislative powers
granted by that Constitution to the
Federal Government may be exercised
by Congress, but no other. Whatev.
er subjects the Constitution says Con-
gross may legislate upon, it is legiti-
mate for that body to take into consid.
Grafton and lesislate in relation to.
But the people in establishing the
Constitution of the United States
granted to Congress no authority to
legislate on the subject of the domes-
tic institutions of the people, and as a
matter of course the power Of domes-
tic legislation remained then and re-
mains now with the people.
1t is only necessary TO ascertain
who are the people spoken of in the
Constitution, to determine whether the
right of domestic Legislation belongs
to the people of the Territories as well
as the people of the States. To as
certain this, look to the Constitution
itself. The article declaring that all
powers and rights not enumerated
and reserved to the people, is in gem
eral icords, and according to the con-
struction Of all judicial tribunals, such
clauses apply to every foot Of Terri
tory within the boundaries of the Re-
public The people, then, to whom
these rights are reserved are "citi-
zens of the United States" and all
such possess these rights whether they
live in Territory or State. This is
the doctrine of all writer's on consti-
tutional law, and it is also the doc
trinc of the much misrepresented bred
Scott decision.
In considering the question of the
government of the Territories, then,
Congress must from necessity give
them form Of government, but in
doing so it confers upon that govern
ment no powers Of domestic legisla-
ton, for the very good reason that
Congress cannot confer what it does
not and never has possessed. But
does it therefore follow that the peo-
pie of the Territories are to be with
out domestic Legislation Or that
Territorial Legislatures possess no
powers to legislate on the subject of |