Delaware inquirer. (Wilmington, Del.) 1859-18??, 1859-11-19
POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY.


the doctrines of the bred Scott case will not
DO the only doctrines Of the Court which will
be disregarded and dishonored. II is impossi-
marks will be destroyed, or to predict the ca
lamities that would ensue. For a time we
might live under them, but ultimately they
would bring to an end our very institutions
themselves. Surprising then that the question
being thus decided, 1t is to be taken that the
Congressional power does not exist, and that
this is as clear as if the words quoted from the
decision formed part of the Constitution it.
self I'VE are brought to the second PROPOSE
ton.
H-Can Congress prohibit or establish sla-
very after granting territorial government.
This is also obviously closed by the same deci-
sion. The want of power at the antecedent
period over the subject, is held to be absolute
and not conditional. 1t is because slave pro-
perty in the territory was not made dependent
upon congressional discretion; the constitution
giving, as against Congress at all times, after
as wcl as before territorial government, the
FlHul 10 Cillhcn W thht BUM II piupoAAg ihNo
any territory of the United States, and enjoy it
unmolestcd by Congress.
The territorial condition remaining, the
right continues to exist as far as Congress is
concerned. But in thus holding, the Court
are not to be considered as having decided
that the privilege is given by virtue of any ex-
press constitutional provision. Slave property
is not even mentioned by name in the fugitive
or any other clause of the instrument. We
know historically, why it was omitted. The
owners of such property were not then as sem
sitive as they are now. The assaults upon the
institution and its supporters which have been
for so many years hurled at both by body of
frenyicd or knavish citizens of the States in
which it ceased to exist, and that too chiefly
by the slaves being sold to the South, have as
their natural consequence, yet more welded
them to the institution, and determined them
not only at all hazards to maintain it, but to
convince them that it is vndicsted upon social,
moral, religious and political grounds; and
the result at one time regretted by many
Southern men, has been to delay indefinitely,
if not forever, its abolition in some of the
States. In all human probability, but for these
attacks Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Ken
lucky and probably Tennessee, would ere this
haya been without the institution. Climate,
soil and staple productions, as well as the sem
timent of the people, were leading to the
change, when all was frustrated by these irri-
tating, insulting attacks from without. This
unfortunate hostility did not prevail at the era
of the Constitution, and its effects were there
fore unknown. Southern men then advised
and with almost one voice, against the inser-
ton of the word itself in the instrument and
the only clauses that were designed to en-
brace it are the LIST art, sec. Q, par. 3, and the
4th art, sec. @ par. 3. With tho exception o.
those, no references is made to slavery except
in the 9th sec. LIST art, which was designed Il
arrest its increase by giving to Congress thu
power to arrest the foreign slave trade, in which
certainly no authority can be found to tax,
such property and hold it in territory of thu
United States. If this therefore can be don,
or prohibited, it is equally clear since the Dret
T. A'fbtt NooNt thht hho AlBhN 10 hob w W
found in any clause of the Constitution.
can only be maintained upon the ground tina
it is not there prohibited, and not being pro
hibited, may be said to be allowed. This pro
position is not now examined. 1t will b
hereafter
1lI.--If there is no power in Congress t
prohibit slavery in a Territory, it would seer
to be yet more clear that they possess none t
establish it. The received opinion everywhere
from the date of the Constitution to the preser
day, has been that slavery is the creature
positive law. This law may be otherwise tina
by statute. Every nation has n common {
unwritten law of its own, and this may main
tain it. But in some mode or other, ther
must be special laws for its support, as it ha
been held that natural law disclaims it. Pre-
perty in man may exist but he is not by natu
raj law property or the subject Of propert.
Contract may bcrelicd upon, and power resorte
to- to create it, but these of themselves do not es
tablsh it, unless sanctioned by the -makinl
power. And il is now too late to question the eI
istence of such power. Such property has
some form or other in a qualified or absolui
esnsc existed in almost every nation in the worl'
and is clearly recognized by our revealed re
ligion. 1t would be as mischievous TO exam
inc too nicely into its justice, as to examin
into our tito to the country we possess. Sue
an investigation as this last would perhaps be
forc tribunal governed by purely moral law
result in shaking il to its foundation as havin
originated in unfair contract or unjustifiabl
force. In the affairs of men some things al
to be esteemed as settled and unquestionabl,
Time, that great conservative element in hu
man society, under the governments of tn
world, places certain rights of property beyon
the intrusiveness of the political "Paul Pry
of the day. These are made TO stand undii
turbcd because of the very antiquity of the
origin. They arc, because they have beer
Custom in their law, "usus efIicacissimus re
auln omnium magistcr." Legitimate powC
may deal with them and modify their charac
tor, and in some cases, for the good of the pull
lie, abolish them. But until this is done the
remain as steadfast as if they had their begir
ming in the purest morality. This being tn
case, the power Of Congress to establish SLAVE
ry must in direct terms or by necessary
fair imnlieation he fnund in the constitutio,