Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1859-10-19
luton is as follows. will thank my friend to


pre united by common executive sovereign, but
not united by any common legislative sovereign.
The legislative power was maintained to be as com
pete in each American Parliament as in the British
Parliament And the royal prerogative was in force
in each colony, by virtue of its acknowledging the
King for its Executive Magistrate, as it was in Great
Britain, by virtue of like acknowledgment there.
A denial of these principles by Great Britain, and
the assertion of them by America, produced the
revolution"
Mr. Madison adds, in substance, that tacitly, and
for convenience Great Britain was allowed to regu-
late the trade with foreign natont, and between the
different parts of the empire But when it was as
serted that Parliament could legisate for the colo
mics in all achafsoerer it provoked such nqui-
nv as showed 1t could do SO in no case phatsoerer.
r. them they stand in relations identical analo
gous what is the true condition of the Territories!
They are coordinate members with each other, and
with the United States of a common empire.
The legislative power in the Territories is as com
plete as in the States and in the Congress. And
Congress has no rgut to make laws for them in any
case whatsoever. These, truly, are high preten
sions and, il well founded the action of the Fed
eral Government in relation to the Territories from
the beginning has been an idle farce
Let us now take practical view of the question,
and see how we stand in relation to it. Anterior
to 1850 the acquisition of territory from Mexico
brought into full play the hostility of large por-
as it existed in the South and revived the old qucs
ton of sectional power. The conflict between the
parties became so bitter and intense that the Union
shook to its centre. Strenuous efforts were made
to allay the storm. The panacea for all the trou-
blcs of the Government was applied and comprO-
mise swagcd The diStempcr for moment by the
very act of compromise Texas was dismembercd,
the executive provso in relation to California ratl-
fed thus excluding the slavchoding States from
&Lo ri, to thn of rc
ton There were some acts intended to DC compcn-
satory The question: however, not being fully set
tied it passed over to the Congress of 1854. That
w then took up the territorial question for final
settlement. The circumstances attending the mat
ter are of SIch recent occurrence that | Will only
audc to them by saying tina. one portion OF the
democratic party held that Congress had the right
to prohibit slavery in Territory and sought to in
duce the exercise of that power The other pnr.inn
not only denied the right, but affirmed that slavery
was recognized in the Territory and protected there
by the Constitution. The subject became so vexa
tous and fruitful of evil that both sides agreed
to Danish it from the halls of Congress and abide
the decision of the Supreme Court of the United
States MS to which view was correct. Hence, Ivy
the kansas Nebraska act" Congress conferred all
the power of local legislation which it had on the
Territories to he exercised by them, subject to the
Constitution If the United States, with the Su-
preme Court as interpreter If that tribunal, upon
appeal should decide that Congress had the ght
to prohibit slavery in the Territory, then Congress
having conferred all the power it had on the subject
to the territorial government the territorial govern
ment could likewise do so. But, if the Supreme
Court should decide that Congress had no such
right, and that slavery recognized and protect
cd in the Territory 10y the Constitution. then, of
course the territorial government had no such right
and could not prohibit it there But, on the con-
trary standing in the place of Congress, and as its
agent like Congress it WOULD be bound not only to
tolerate, but to protect property in slaves as it
would all other kinds Of property. And, when the
inhabitants of the Territory, in the proper manner.
became the people Of State, they could, and would,
like all other States, deal with the subject as they
pleased. IL this be the arrangement. it is wise and
just, and, for one am willing to abide by it. But
new idc"a have recently been advanced on the
subject, and, If they prevail, must destroy e'v,!
feature of wise and just arrangen ent and leave it
de!uSion and snare. Let us glance at some of
them.
1t is affirmed that territorial legislature may,
within the limits of the constitution, by doing ill.,
directly what it cannot do directly, accomplish all
the purposes Of plenary power over the subject
First, by unfriendly legislation. Secondly, non
action and, as ancary to these, by limiting the
jurisdiction of the courts. deny them ALL.
The potency of unfiiendly Legislation" is to ex-
hibt itself by discriminating systems of taxation,
and by perversion of the taxing power as well as
by non-action. Let consider them. The power
to tax is vested in all constitutional governments,
and especially in our American systems, for the
purpose only of raising rcvcnuc--rcvenue. the main
purpose Of which is to protect the property out
of which it arises, well as the persons who
own it. To maintain. therefore, that the power
to tax can, within the limits Of the constitution be
used with view to destroy the very thing for which
it is vested means of protection is abSurdty.
lrf
i in the civilized world where constitutional govern
/ ments prevail, a respectable court that would not
declare such Legislation unconstitutional and void.
/ Hence the importance of keeping the courts open
to meet the unfrendly legislation and the effects Of
non-actiOm. And hence the anxiety to close them,
that such purposes may become cffectual
affirm that the courts territorial and federal in
their proper ORDER will and must take jurisdiction of
all causes properly instituted to determine the rights
Of property, matter whether that property be in
slaves clocks, oxen And they will have juriSdc-
ton under the constitution without statute. But,
if territorial legislature should undertake to limit
the jurisdiction of its courts so to exclude the
rights Of shareholders, then undertake to say that,
having thus manifested purpose to make war upon
property instead of giving ii protection, it has ceas
cd to perform the main function of government, and
ought to be abolished. No one having just con-
ccpton of the objects of government can hesitate to
say that any government of whatever FORM wherev-
or existing, which deliberately, and as a system,
makes war on the property of the citizen, ought to
be abolished.
Thus, gentlemen, have stated my opinion of the
necessities of the South, and recommended such
conduct as will be most likely to produce harmonious
and concerted action. have presented, also, my
views of the leading issues before you with candor
and, | hope, with becoming difference. | trust
however, am not one of those incased in the ar
NOR Of selfconccit that the penetration of any ray
of light will be impossible. l do not cultivate that
kind of consistency which can contumaciously con
front the truth in spite Of conviction. But my opin
ions, though not elaborated with the care and pre-
csion dueto the occasion, are deliberate They art
before you to be canvassed criticised adopted, OIL
rejected as they may have in them the force of truth
or the weakness of error.
As to the future of the South who can compass
it? What prophets eye can pierce the veil +? VIII
can foresee the full bearing and final disposition
the many contingencies which come athwart it
destiny? These determine the future and they ar
| for the ken of HIGHER Douerc Gpow-