Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1859-07-22

Dred Scott decision, and the Constitu-
tiopal righ. ofthc STAKEHOLDER to casry
his slaves into the territories these they
/ regard al grave questions. rather judicial
i'll their nature, and hard for tho Dcmoc-
racy to settle.
They are undecided, confused on tlcso
points, but. however theee qucstiuns may
b., Of one thing they are clear, do know,
are willing with their great leader to be
committee. viz: that the people Of the
territories have the absolute right" Of
what? To decide the character of their
domestic institutions in their own way
To exclude slave,y' NO. not exactly
that" What then; "why. If slavery
is in the territories under the Constitu.
ton. il may be that the people csnnor
exclude it. but We hold they possess tho
grea. right to be un)riendiy to it. TO re.
fuse to legislate for its proteetio and
support" These men it Is plain, hang
on fallscy, and when they see it and
that their leader knows it 70 bs fallscy
and only supports il a. mskeshift. they
will abandon it and him. What 10 leis
to this class2 They must abandon De.
mocracy, Lecompton and Buchanan. or
submit and swallow all. Verify thy
servant is not dog" and yet many will
do this latter thing-morc il 10 hoped
will not
1t is distii ctively claimsd that the
Constitution recognizes property in
slaves that under it, the master may
carry his slave property into the terrific
ries, and there By force Of il may hold il;
that it cannot be excluded thetsfrom.
and that it is the duty Of the territory to
protect it. This claim assumes that
slaves are property by virtue Of the Fed
eral Constitution, and being so the ma
tion is in good faith bound to protect
it. Already two branches Of the Feder-
al Government lave informally recog.
nized these as substantially the legal
ana constitutional rights of the South.
These claims are novel and extraordina-
ry, and are not yet conceded to be the
Constitutional rights Of the slave States
by the great body Of the people Of this
country--its jurists and statesme al
though hesitate not to declare these to
be the opinions and policy of the Ad-
ministration aud of the dominant party.
| do no. forget the significant fact that
there is a division in that party, ard
that the Northern portion Of the party
does not give its full assent to all that 10
asserted. 1t is important to understand
upon what the leaders divide. and what
constitutes the real difference between
the advocates of slavery under the Con-
stitution, above tho reach Of the people
and entitled to protection. and the
champion of "Popular Sovereignty"
have already given the position Of the
former. The latter is this:
'We agree that under the decision of the Su-
preme Court of the United States SLAVES are proper.
ty, standing IN rqssi oosiny with all ofha proper.
~; and that, consequently, the owner ofs slave
has the same right TO emigrate to territory and
carry his slave property with him, as tho OVER
of any species of property has to move there aud
carry his property With him."
There is distinct recognition Of the
rights Of slave property, and Il g right of
transit to and from the territories. Now
for the right or power to deal with it
when there and exclude it! Do the ad.
vocates of popular Sovereignty" hold
that Congress may exclude it? Certain
ly not. We'll. if Congress has not the
power to inhibit slavery, have the pso.
pie Of the territory that power' Tho
Il hold that /. territory possessed" 4" ';1ns.ev.r
power it de'iuex from the Constitution under the
organic act and NJ hold that all the pow.
er Territorial Legislature possesses, is derived
from the Constitution and its amendments under
tho act of Congress-"
Congress it will be seen is asserted to
have no power to exclude or inhib;t slav-
cry and the territory no moro than n
"derived und.r the act OF Congress"
How much is that: of course no power
directly to inhibit or exclude it. and
none is pretended What then, If
the master has the right Of property in
his slave un Ter the Constitution, and
the right Of transit into the territory, and
neither Congress nor the people Of the
territory have power to inhibit or ex-
clude it, what right or power have the
people OF the territory. ii any. to deal
with it? Let the same dstin ,uishtd
authority answer.
THAT il is ompetent for the National Legis-
latu,e, by the exercise of the taxing power and
other functions within the limits of the Constitu.
tion. to adopt u.tr,erdly legislation, which prac.
tically drives slavery out of the territory"
That is to say-the territory has not
the Constitutional right to exclude
"slave property. which stands upon an
equal footing with any ether species Of
property but i, is asserted to have tho
powcr, through the exercise Of the ",ax-
ing power of imposing inimical, arbi.
trar. taxation, and thereby practically
dflre "ut slarery, standing upon an
equal footing with all other property"
Ii it were not obvious that this is but .
pititul evasion. to escape from rcspon-
sibility which attaches to the concession
of constitutional right OF property in
slaves, and SO not entitled 10 a second
thought. the inm rality Of the PROPOSE
ton would not fail to stamp it crimo
wherever the principles Of justice or 80.
cial duties are recognized.
But further, saws the same authority,
81 am asked whether the Southern pco-
pie have not right, under the Constitu-
ton. to bring their slaves therc:" II
answer yes; the same right that you
have to carry any other properly" Then