The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1858-05-12

| PROPERTY COMMON TO ALL THE STATES "
l say add but one ounce of this peculiar
property, add one single slave, and the
beams Of " common and equal benefit"
of " equality and justice" will break be-
meath the unlawful weight. Now, sir, if
am right; if have justly appreciated this
piece Of judicial and executive mechanic
ism, submit it as good law, that the slave
owner, or the slave-driver, who puts his
load through the bottom Of that bridge,
cannot require any Government-Federal,
territorial or Stste-to respond in dam
ages.
MIR. Chairman, il is time, and is it but
| fair to turn to the declarations of the court.
The President charges all the court. Three
times has he spoken in the name of the
court. l give you, now, the declarations
of the majority Of the court, declared by
the Chief Justice, barely remarking that
they are, subsequently, copied from Mr.
| Calhouns resolutions, of S47,
As to territory, Judge Taney says:
1t was acquired by the General Government
as the representative and trustee Of the people OF
| the United States, and it must therefore, be held
In that character for their common and equal ben
l
acting through their agent and representatives. the
| Federal Government, who in fact acquired the
| territory in question: and the Government holds
il for their common until il shall be associated
! 18th the other States a member OF the Union."
Dred Scott Decision, pamphlet, page 81.
AS shareholders he said
THE territory being part Of the United States
| the Government and the ciizens both enter it
| under the authority Of b.. Constitution, with heir
respective rights defined and marked out - SaHe.
| page s.
As to slave property, Judge Taney said
that the Constitution makeS no distinc
ton between that description of property
and other property; that the right of
property in slave is distinctly and er-
pressiy a6i,med in the Constitution )"
that " no word can be found in the Con-
stitution which gives Congress greater
power over slave property, or which cntit-
les property OF that kind to less protection
than property Of any other description.
The only power conferred is the power
coupled with the duty of gaa,ding and
protecting thsown in his rights" Same
pages 81, 5S.) As a conclusion, the judge
said
" Upon these considerations, it is the opinion Of
tue court that the act OF Congress, which prohb
J tied citizen from holding and owning property
Of this kind in the territory OF the United States.
t,c is not uGTf dnted by the Constitution, and is
htreftre roid."-Same page 6s
The burden OF the court is, that slaves
are property, and that the title to the
Territories is held by the Federal Govern
ment as mere trustee, leaving the use to
the States and their people But not one
word of all this is found in the Constitu-
tion The court gives them to US as fun.
damental principles of constitutional law;
and, as conclusions, strips Congress of a
power exercised from the very foundation
Of the Government, and opens all our
Territories to slavery Is it not strange
that principles so great as these were en-
tirely omitted from the Constitution ?
strange that they were left to mere impli-
cation or Interpretation and strange that
no Congress, no statesmen, no jurists, and
not even this court itself, ever discovered
them, until two thirds of century had
elapsed? Now, sir, do not believe that
tn, whole country hath been in ignorance
until this day. do not believe that these
principles we're ever put into the Consti
tuition, or designed 10 be drawn from it
That instrument puts no limit to the pow
, er of Congress over Fedora territory but
rather grants the power, TO make all
needful rules and regulations respecting
it. l sec nothing in it like guarantee
of The use of all the Territories for slave
ry, or even use Of it by citizens G.
States for any purpose whatever, withou
Federal consent The title and the SOW
/ ereignty are both III the Federal Govern
ment, rs Judge Taney himself has said
tho powers Of government and the righ
E Of soil as the Supreme Court hiss said
/ (S Wheaton, 543)--and Federal sover
? eighty has heretofore excluded both prop
, e,ty Qiquors) and citizens (traders) from
Federal territory, and alienated the yer,
r land itself to foreign Governments
b. seems, then, that the court has revolution
lied the Constitution in this respect. No
can believe in--nay, utterly reject
i the new doctrine that the Constitution NJ
I firms The right If proDOfg IN sfapes
3. -Four times does it speak Of them as "per
4 sons" not once as pl 0perty. Indeed tn
q very record shows that all countenance t
Il the idea of property in man was CAREFUL
4 and designedly excluded. Thus:
d Mr. Sherman was against this second pa
e [sec. 8, act l. the AK ON importation Of slaV e,
. as acknowledging men 10 be property."-6 Elliot
Debates in Federal ConreRhOR, vol. 8, page 47s.
Mr.. Gorham thought that hir Sherman shou
?, consider the duty, not as i1.phiRg that sldres al
= property, but as a discoumgement to the imports
u tion Of them."-Sdme.
II " Mr.. Madison thought il tcrong 10 admit ia
- Consultation the idea that there could BE- property
- men. The reason of duties did not hold, Us slav
i are no, like merchandise, consumed" &c.-San'
l. Thus is the case of the solitary word
r. the Constitution which could possibly col
Al vey the idea of property in man" in
l. portation the inference was prompt
II and plainly repelled upon the first SUI
y gestion. The true design, then of Il
IF Trainers of the Constitution is defeated !
I, the court. 1t is the court, then, which
=" responsible for this new and sweeping di
es pensation. 1t is the court which affec
n. the power Of sovereignty, and grants,
,s, its own will and pleasure, new constit
r., tion 1t is the President who interpre
rs it, who accepts it for the States and Il
p people, and who attempts to bind it upC
In their Representatiyee here with all h