Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1860-12-12

OF our hlgncSt CONSTITUTIONAL tflouHaf " popular n
semblics would, if they could, invest territorial
legislature with power to annul the sacred rights OF
property. This power Congress is expressly for
hidden by the Federal Constitution to exercise
Every State Legislature in the Union is forbidden
BY its own constitution to exercise it. 1t cannot he
exercised in any State except by the people in their
highest sovereign capacity when framing or amend
ing their State constitution. In like manner, 1t can
only be exercised by the people Of Territory rep
resented in convention of delegates for the rur-
pose of framing a constitution preparatory 20 all
mission as State into the Union. Then, and not
until then, are they invested with power to decide
the question whether slavery shall or shall not exist
within their limits. This is act of sovereign au-
horty and not Of subordinate territorial legislation
Were it otherwise, then indeed would the equality
of the States in the Territories be destroyed and the
rights of property in slaves would depend, not upon
the guarantees of the Constitution, but upon the
shifting uaiorites of an irresponsible territorial leg
islature SucI, doctrine, from its intrinsic un-
soundness, cannot long influence any considerable
portion of our people, much less can it afford good
reason for a dissolution Of the Union.
The most papable violations of constitutional
duty which have yet been committed consist in the
acts of different State legislatures to defeat the ex
ecuton of the fugitive slave law 1t ought to he re-
membercd however, that for these acts, neither
Congress nor any President can justly be held re-
sponsible. Having been passed in violation of the
Federal Constitution, they therefore null and
void All the courts both State and national, be-
fore whom the question has arisen, have from the
beginning declared the fugitive slave law to be con-
stitutonal The single exception is that of a State
court in Wisconsin; and this has not only been re-
versed by the proper appellate tribunal but has met
with such universal Reproduction that there can he
no danger from it as precedent. The validity OF
this law has been established over and over again
~ 4 A. ,,t.,,l
perfect unaniInty 1t is founded upon an express
provision of the Constitution, requiring that fusi-
tive slaves who escape from service in one State to
another shall be delivered up" to their masters
Without this provision it is well known historical
fact that the Constitution itself could never have
been atopted By the Convention In one form or
other under the acts of 1888 and 1850, both being
substantially the same, the fngitve-slave law has
been the law of the land from the days OF Washing
ton until the present moment Here, then, clear
case is presented in which it will he the duty of the
next President, as it has been my own, to act with
vigor in executing this supreme law against the
fcting enactments of State legislatures Should he
fail in the performance of this high duty, he will
then have manifested disregard of the Consttu-
ton and laws. to the great injury Of the people Of
nearly one-half of the States of the Union. But
are we to presume in advance that he will thus vio
late his duty? This would be at war with every
principle Of justice and of Christian charity, Let
us wait for the over act The fng't!ve-save law has
been carried into execution in every contested case
since the commencement of the present atniinistra
ton; though often is to be regretted with great
loss and inconvenience to the master, and with con-
siderable expense to the government Let us trust
that the State legislatures will repeal their uncon
sttution and obnoxious enactments. Unless this
shall be done without unnecessary delay, it is i'm
possible for any human power to save the Union.
The Southern States standing OH the basis of the
Constitution, have right to demand this act of jus
tice from the States of the North. Should it be
fused then the Constitution to which all the States
are parties will have been wfally violated by one
portion of them in provision essential to the do
nestle security and happiness of the remainder
In that event. the injured States after having first
used all peaceful and constitutional means to obtain
redress, would be justified in revolutionary resist
ance to tho Government Of the Union.
have purposey confined my remarks to revolu-
tonary resistance because it has been claimed with
in the last few years that any State, whenever this
shall be its sovereign will and pleasure may secede
from the Union, in accordance with the Constitu-
ton ard without any violation of the constitutional
rights of the other members Of the Confederacy.-
That as each became parties to the Union by the
vote of its own people assembled in Convention, so
any of them may retire from the Union in sim
liar manner by the vote of such convention.
In order to Justify secession as constitutional
remedy it must be on the principle that the Federal
Government is voluntary ASSOCIATION of
States to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the
contracting parties. If this be So the Confederacy
is rope of sand, to be penetrated and dissolved by
the first adverse wave OF public opinion in any of the
States. In this manner thirty three States may
resolve themselves into as many petty, jarrng and
hostile republics each one retiring from the Union,
without responsibility, whenever any sudden excite
ment might impel them to such course. By this
process Union might be entirely broken into frag-
ments in few weeks which cost our torcfathcrs
many years Of TOLL privation, and blood to cs-
tablish
Such principle is wholly Inconsistent with the
history well as the character of the Federal Con-
stituton. After it was framed with the greatest
deliberaton and care, it was submitted to conven.
tons of the people of the several States for ratica-
ton. It's provisions were discussed at length in
these bodies composed of the first men of the coun-
try. Its opponents contendcd that it conferred pow
ers upon the Federal Government dangerous to tie
rights of the States, whilst its advocates maintained
/ that under a fair construction of the instrument
there was no foundation for such apprehensions In
that mighty struggle between the first ntellects Of
this any other country. it occurred to any
individual either among its opponents or advocates
to assert to intimate that their efforts were
all vain labor, because the moment that any State
! felt herself aggrieved she might secede from the
Union. What crushing argument would this have
proved against those who dreaded that the rights Of
the States would be endangered by the Constitution
The truth is, that it was not until many years afte,
the orr gin of the Federal Government that such q
proposition was first advanced 1t was then mel
and refuted by the conclusive arguments of Genera
jackson, who in his message of 18th January, 1888
transmitting the multiplying ordinance of South Caro-
lima to Congress, employs the following language
1.-The right of the people of single State to absove
themselves at will, and without the consent of tho
other States, from their most solemn obligations
and hazard the liberty and happiness of the millions
composing this Union, cannot be acknowledged
Such authority is believed to be utterly repugnan
both to the principles upon which the General Gov
eminent is constituted and to the objects which i
was expressly formed to attain"
1t is not pretended that any clause in the Consti
tuition gives countenance to such theory 1t il
altogether founded upon inference not from an,
language contained nthe instrument ITSELF but from
the sovereign people of the several States by which
| woS ratified Rut;c II havopd tho of Sfoto