Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1859-04-12

4 Inc law recently passed By the Territorial
Leg stature Of New Mexico, for the protection
OF property in slaves, Is received with bitter
oenuneiatiohs BY the Black-Rspubliean press
al ne North. They hold that Il lsgalizes and
establishes slavery, and some o. them intimate
tlat 4 may Be held to be the du-y Of the next
lengress % interpose its authority and annul
de act. The uncertainty whether the avowal
Of such purpose may not obstruct them IN
getting the majority which is necessary 20
make the attempt succeed, probably DELAYS the
announcement Of the purpose. Il nav cone
after awhile. But IN the interim soae south
ern journals are quite disturbed with an appa-
Tsn; parallelisn Of this claim Of federal power
70 Ennul al act fer the P-otection Of slavery,
with the eiaim Of a federal duty 10 protect
slsveholdsr agaiHst hostile territorial egisla ton
or terrific ial refusal Of protection Thev i'm
agns they see in the Obvious danger and clear
uneonstitu.ionslity Of such uufriendly interpo-
sitiou, an additional and conclusive motive for
concedng an absolute power Of the territorial
legislatures at al times, over al branches Of
the subject, to abolish and expel as well as 70
regulate and protect slaveh0lding.
Bat there IS a logical difference in the two
casesi which olght to sppease such appTshsn-
sio7s. Before the late Judgments Of ihe su-
preme Court The slbiect q slavery IN the Ter
ritoiies vas Political one. Parties had then
opposits opinions II the constitutional powsrs
Of Congress 70 forbid, to permit or to intro
duos Il, and c11iei these Questions into the
legislation and politics Of the country TO a de-
gree which was eEasperating and became dan
gerous- An agreement was finally enacted,
that there should be no political Intervention
for or ssagslnst the Shareholders BY Congress,
but that the Inhabitants Of the Territories
should be left to shape their own institutions,
subject 10 the Constitution Of the United S stes
The constitutional question was subject 10 a
judicial construction, which should Be binding,
and take away TIE right Of political agitation
The Judicial decision has been had as plainly
- language could make il, End that declares
slavery to Be legal in all tn Territories Of the
United States BY force Of the Constitution.
There Is no longer any riChtful question Of in
terrent or non-intrrTention bV Congress TO
establish slavery. That is among The eTets
issues which q new and authoritative erposi.
ton az the supreme law has swept cut Of the
way There is 10 longer question of political
opinion or policy OF eKpedieney, bat the plain
and single one Of slbmission 70 established
Law.
What u invoked a. Intervention has no'hiug
TO do with the establishing Of status, which
the fundamental law has Fixed, but the obligs-
ton 70 respect what the law has declared, and
70 carry It into effect The Legislature Of
New Mexico has lsgislsted to protect what the
Constitution Of the United S-otes recognizes a.
property. II Congress should interfere to an
nul this prohibition, Il would Be a manifest
violation Of the Constitution or a direct attack
upon the rights Of properly, amounting 10 con
tsca-ion. Il Is q very Illogical deduction that
because Congress cannot interfere 70 destroy
right Of property IN one Territory, Il cannot
interfere in another, 70 defeat Combinations 70
aunul the same rights or neElects which have
the sane effect Indeed, the abstinence from
inierposition in one case, and the obligation
70 in-erpose in the other, rest on the same rules
Of duly % provide IN good faith the iadieisl
construction Of rights Under the Constitution Of
the United States.
Il may very well be that thoughtful men.
in view Of grave consequences and practical
results, nay forbear 70 invoke The action Of
Congress, except in some cases Of emergency,
where permanent interests are al stake. and an
lssis Is desired Tor purposes worthy OF such in
terposition-but such forbearance VIII not Be
based on any admissions that they have not a
constitutional right 70 such protection, or on
TIE illogical deduction that the denial Of right
o interposih 4 to destroy, include the denial
OF the right to intsrposs 10 protect property
and righ.sTested under he Consiitution.LVlr
OTlsaas Picavzne