The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1859-01-20
THE NATIONAL ERA: WASHINGTON D. G, JANUARY 20 1859

munity from which Slavery is excluded till it be-
comes State, will it ever be subsequently, es-
tablished. 1t is said that by the bred Scott de-
cision the power of Congress to prohibit Slavery
is denied | answer, there is no such decision
the opinions of the slaveholding judges upon this
point were mere o5iter dicta, of no binding force
whatever and, further, that if they were opinions
upon questions before the court, they would not
be binding, as statement of political truths,
upon Congress or the people. The people are
the source of power, and the ultimate judges in
all political questions. Sir if there is any man,
or number of men, in this country, who are au-
thorzed to decide political questions, and from
whose DEGREES there is no appeal, then we have
a despotism and it matters not whether there is
one despot or nine, or whether the power is
lodged with King, Directory, or Supreme
Court. And, sir, to repudiate and resent this
usurpation of the slaveholding judges, this as
sumption Of authority to decide such questions,
and to impose a master upon the people, l would
have Congress, on all proper occasions, affirm
aud exercise the right to legislate for the prohi
bition of Slavery in the Territories. This should
be done, that there may be no presumptions
against this right from non-user or acquiescences
in the opposite theory. For these considerations,
| desire to thank my friend from Missouri 1Mr.
BLAIR for the resolutions which he offered in
the House few days ago, drawn, as l am in
formed by the distinguished gentleman who
represented that State for so long period in the
Senate of the United States, Colonel Benton. }
One of them is as follows, and it contains sound
doctrine
90. Resolped, That said decisions are in dero-
cation of the power of Congress, and restrictive
of its tme-honored rights and practice to legis-
: latefor Territories and being so derogatory and
{ restrictive, it becomes the duty of Congress TO
vndicate its rights by asserting its full author
ity to legislate upon Slavery in Territories, and
declaring its total disregard Of the said illegal,
: extra-judicial, and void decisions of the Su-
preme Court; which, accordingly, is hereby
done"
MIR BLAIR. Those resolutions were drawn by
Colonel Benton. have the original in my pos
session, in his handwriting
Mr.. WA,HBURN, of Maine. Mr.. Chairman,
the fate of the Territories to be formed from our
unoccupied domain, is in the keeping of Congress
and it will be for it to determine, so far as
some of them at least are concerned whether
they shall be slave or free.
But the Republican party does not stop with
the assertion that Congress ought to intervene to
keep Slavery out of the Territories 1t also
maintains-if have been properly instructed in
what it has inscribed upon its list of duties and
wherever, for any reason, an act
of Congress cannot be passed to keep Slavery out
of a Territory, the only remaining way to secure
this end shall be resorted to, and the people of
the Territories permitted to exclude it by their
own legislative authority. 1t would rely upon
the people of the Territory to repress an evil
which can be reached by no other power but it
does not leave to popular sovereignty the oppor-
tunity ito introduce an undoubted evil into
Territory, commit an acknowledged crime
when it can legally prevent it. To act other
wise-to say to the people of a Territory,
Slor- = - L.
lasting curse to you if you have it we can keep
it from your midst if we WILL but we choose not
to do so, in order that you may have an oppor-
tunty to reject it if that shall be your pleasure -
would be weak indeed; and worse than weak in
those where it would be seen beforehand that
they would not reject it. Yet, am told, there are
men in the Republican ranks who insist that this
policy is a very unwise and mistaken
policy and that, although Congress has I'M
doubtedly the right to prohi bit Slavery it ought
not to exercise it, but should leave to the people
of the Territories decide for themselves whether
or not they will have what they 1.-THE Republicans
declare to be an unmitigated and gigantic EVIL.
And who are the people to whom it is proposed
to leave this question? A few hundreds of run
Always or outlaws, it may be- And who are to
be affected by their decision? All the people of
the United States. To these first inhabitants,
such as they are, good or bad, is to be left the
settlement of questions of supreme importance to
all the States questions like these shall there
be majority of free States or shall the slave
States outnumber the free? Shall democratic
ideas or aristocratic be encouraged? Shall the
Government be republican or oligarchical2 Shall
Congress be so constituted that its majorities
will protect free labor, or Cypress it? The peo-
pie of the States are interested in these questions
deeply, vitality; and they have the power to de-
termine what the answers to them shall be. But
it is proposed that those who ,coud decide right,
should abdieate in favor of the people of the
Territories, who may decide wrong.
1t is safer and wiser, hear it said, to leave
people to act freely, than to hedge them around
with legal restraints. 1t is better that people
should do right because they desire to, than be-
cause the law keeps them from doing wrong
But whether it is better that they should do
wrong, there being no law, than to do no wrong,
the law preventing is question which would
commend to the consideration of the philosophers
OF popular sovereignty. This theory of giving
men the largest opportunity to do wrong to them
selves and Others strikes at all legal restraints
| am not prepared to say that it would be wise
to repeal all our penal laws because it is better
that man should do right for the rights sake
than from fear of punishment. To carry out the
ideas of these gentlemen to their logical results,
your statutes against larceny, murder, treason,
may be left perfectly free to do as they will; be-
cause if they will not steal, or kill, or seek to
overthrow the State, in the absence of law for
bidding these crimes, they will, not improbably,
oe better men and citizens than if they had been
placed IN circumstances where such laws might
have had an influence upon their characters
and lives.
On the whole, sir, I think will stand by the
ancient ways. will abide with the old pru-
lence, and where have two weapons to destroy
a monster, will not throw away either | am
not quite prepared to adopt theory which would
compel me to say to the people of Utah: Form
your own institutions in your own way it is
better you should practice polygamy without
stint, than that Congress should restrain you by
law"
The theory of Territorial sovereignty may be
consistent enough with the principles of Senator
DOUGLAS, and those who like him, consider it a
matter of indifference whether Freedom or
Slavery shall be established in State, and who
,hlnk that, on the whole, it would be better to
have some slave States than none but how it
IAN Ind favor with those who regard Slavery
as wrong, or great impolicy, confess | am
unable to understand.
One word more on this subject. Granting
hat there is further necessity for resorting to
congressional Intervention, and all that can be
1one hereafter must be accomplished by popular
sovereignty, is there any great wisdom in hur-
rylng to renounce our old faith, in parading our
former opinions mistakes before the country.
IN saying, in effect that Senator DOUGLAS did
what was right in principle when he brought in
The Nebraska bill, and that those who opposed
him were in error, and ought at once to have
ALLEN In with the Illinois Senator, and aided him
N his efforts to " establish a great principle ?"
suppose they had done so, and no excitement
had arisen, as in that case none would. Kansas,
rom its proximity to Missouri, would have been,
nevitaoly, slave State, and the question of
republican or oligarchic would have been al
ready decided.
Mr.. Chairman, how can party hope to obtain