East Saginaw courier. (East Saginaw, Mich.) 1859-18??, 1859-09-15
THE COURIER.
The Question tn n Practice nj Point
of View.

Oh StcNs
The following article from the Detroit
Free Press is sound, sensible and practi
cal in regard to the question of local and
Congressional legislatioain the territories
The views therein are such as no Demo
crat can take exception to- and the fact
as stated, is becoming more apparent
every day, "that democrats of every
shade of opinion on the whole question
A" are settling into the opinion that with
respect to it, sufficient unto the day is
the evil thereof-that in other words
+" there is no use in differing about the
matter as it now stands. 1t will be
time to differ about it when practical
A" case is presented; and even then
" there will be no difference, for as the
4" Supreme Court shall decide, so will the
/" rule be established"
While it is admitted that it was the
opinion of the Supreme Court in the bred
Scott case that Congress cannot prohibit
slavery in the Territories, il is contended
by many that it does not follow that the
Territorial legislatures cannot prohibit
it. This being disputed point, the
Supreme Court will decide it. Mean.
while il is certainly no more than Just
and proper that the Territorial legisla-
lures should protect all property alike,
and leave the question of the establish
ment or prohibition of slavery to be de-
termined by the constitution of the State
when it shall be formed This much, at
any rate, is due to minority of the
States. And we do not believe it need
be doubted that the legislatures of those
Territories into which shareholders would
think of removing with their property
will protect them in the enjoyment of it.
New Mexico has recently passed protec-
tive laws, Notwithstanding that there are
scarcely any slaves in the Territory and
that it will not become a slave State. 1t
will not become a slave State for the
reason stated by Mr.. WEBSTER in 1850,
and that it was not, in soil and climate
adapted to slave labor. Shareholders
will not remove with their property to a
Territory which stands in no likelihood
of becoming a slave State, so that there
will be no demand for protective laws
where the demand would not be granted.
We see, then, that the question is not a
very practical one. We doubt indeed
whether it will ever arise in practical
form for the decision Of the Supreme
Court.
In this view-and it is the true view
democrats of every shade of opinion
on the whole question are settling into
the opinion that, with respect to it, suf
ficient unto the day is the evil thereof
that, in other words, there is no use in
differing about the matter as it now
stands. 1t will be in time to differ abou,
it when practical case shall be present
ed and even then there shall be no diff
ference, for as the Supreme Court shall
decide so will the rule be established.
But with referece to one thing in al
this connection, the democratic doctrine
is settled. NoN-INTERFERENcE by Con
DRESS. The doctrine was settled before
the Supreme Court expressed the opinion
that Congress could not interfere against
slavery. The doctrine is as strong Al
ever that it shall not interfere for slavery
The object Of the doctrine having beer
to withdraw the whole subject of slavery
from the arena of Federal politics, anc
leave it to the control and jurisdiction o
the people among whom slavery exists
action by Congress concerning it in any
shape cannot be tolerated. And it neve,
will be tolerated. To exclude the whole
subject from the arena of Federal politics
is what the democratic party has beer
battling for for years. 1t has broker
down the northern Wu~otprovieo;.ts IL
the field, and the Supreme Court has pro
nounccd the democratic principle a
against them the sound constitutions
principle. 1t will in like manner breal
down the southern interventionists, anc
no doubt the Supreme Court will sustain
the democratic principle in that regard