Staunton vindicator and general advertiser. (Staunton, Augusta County, Va.) 1858-1860, 1859-10-21
the case. where is itE

Wooster. was repudiating and denyiug Tic
doctrine Of sovereignty in the Territories.
and resuming his old position that they are
not sovereign powers, it would have been
well to fall back upon something a little
more ineligible than his reports to the Sem
ate, or his anti Lecomptoa letter to Phila-
delphia. Here is the way be describes SOW
ereignty in his report Of 1856:
"The sovereignty Of Territory remaina
in abayance, suspended in the United States.
IN trust for the people until they shall b
admitted into the Union as a State"
What do these words mean, and in whist
possible way can they help US to Q knovI-
edge of the matter under consideration s--
Aoeyance is good law French, and signifies
the peculiar condition of an estate after ono
tenant has died, and before his successor 4
competent to take it. But what applies
ton can it have, even by analogy. to SOW
ereignty which never existed 1t seems.
too. that this sovereignty is suspended in the
United States; that is, hung or dependent
from something in the United States, and
not Independent like every other sovereign
ty under heaven But the most marvel
lous part of the business is that one govern
ment viii ch Is sovereign is represented -
a trustee of the sovereignty of another gov
eminent. which is admitted not to be SOW
ereign This is the talk Of n, IN who has
too much learning These technical terms
Of the common law were invented by Eng
lish conveyancers and real property lawyers.
for the purpose Of expressing the artificial
relations which men sometimes bear 70
lauds, tenements, and hereditaments; but
they are wholly inapplicable to such sub
ject as the sovereignty of State or nation.
We might as well call Territorial sovereign
ty a contingent remainder. an e1eoutery
devise, or special fee tail.
There is some confusion Of ideas on an
other subject. Mr.. Douglas and his disoi-
pies ascribe to certain Democrats TO the
President among others) the belief that the
Constitution establishes slavery in the Ter
rltories and to sustain this accusation they
quote from message in which tho sxIs-
TENcE of slavery i'll the Territories Ly vir-
tue Of the Constitution is asserted on tho
authority of the Supreme Court. Now We
are in the wrong, if the expression that a
thing e1ists by virtue Of the Constitution
be equivalent to saying that the Constitu-
ton has cstabliahed it, There il not only
q substantial, but wide aud most obvious
difference. The Constitution does not es-
tablish Christianity 10 the Territories; bus
Christianity exists there by virtue OF tho
Constitution because when Christian
moves into Territory he cannot bo pre-
vented from taking his religion along With
him nor can be afterwards BE- legally mo-
Tested for making its principles the rule Of
his faith and practice.
We have said. aud we repeat, that a man
does not forfeit his right Of property ia q
slave by migrating with him to Terrific
ry. The title which ths owner acquired in
the State from whence be came must be
respected in his new donicl as it was in
the old, until it is legally and constitution
ally Invested. The proposition Is undsnia-
bic But the absurd inference which some
persons have drawn from it is net true .h.t
the master also takes With him the judicial
remedies which were furnished hlm at the
place where the title was acquired Whe.h-
er the relation Of master aud slave exists on
cot, is question which must DO determine
ed according to the law Of the State ia
which it was created but the respective
rights and obligations Of the parties nust
De protected and enforced by the law pre-
valling at the place where they are sur-
posed to be violated This is also true xi,h
respect to rights Of every other kind Two
merchants living in the same town may tuy
their goods in different States Can it be
doubted that the title Of each depends on
the law Of the State where lie made his par
chase But the law Of larceny and tree
pass is the law Of forum common TO both,
and must necessarily be the came Ths
validity of mans marriage il tried by the
standard of the law which prevsiled 10 the
country where twas solemnisod; but If he
beats his wife, she must seek projection
from the law Of the place where they live
Some OF Mr.. Douglass part.sans, asd
pearly all Of the anti-slavery oppositico.
contend that property 10 slaves cannot ex-
ist so as to entitle it to the protection Of the
same laws which secure the right of prop
erty in other things. For their benefit we
shall briefly show how impossible it is 70;
admit the distinction which they insist upon.
WHAT'S property? Whatever person
msy legally appropriate TO his own exclu-
siVe use and transfer to another by sale Or
gift. BY the laws Of the southern States.
negroes are within this definition, and the
Constitution Of the United States not only
recognizes the validity Of the State laws,
but it aids in carrying them ous. Tbs
trainers of the Constitution, seeing that
slaves were liable to one danger from which
all other property wasvxcmpt, namely. thas
Of being seduced away by the offer, ia other
States, of legal shelter from the pursuit Of
their owners. agreed that the Federal Gov
ernment should guarantee their redelyery
to the exclusive possession of the persons
entitled to them as p7oprletors. The law,
then, of the States in which they are and
the Constitution of the Federal Govern
ment, to all legal intents and purposes, pro-
nounce that slaves are property. Beaten
here, our adversaries convert it from le-
gal to a theological question. Blu, when
they appeal from the Constitution to the
Bible. they are equally dissatisfied With the
decision they get Nothing is left them but
that Higher Law" which has no sanction
nor no authority. Divine or human =
Those who reject the Constitution must be
content to follow guides who are stone blind.
They are men who aspire to be wise above
what is written, and thereby press them
cajvac 6nuu fn fha pOipt IF hu-