New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-06-01

to Judge from Mr. Benjamin's recent
speech in the Senate, the charge against Mr.
Douglas does not rest so much upon any power
and authority admitted to reside in the Supreme
Court to decide political questions, as upon
special agreement among the Democratic lenders
in Congress to refer to the arbitration of the o"-
preme Court special difference which had arisen
among those leaders as to the rights of Territorial
Legislatures to prohibit the introduction slavery
The charge urged by Mr.. Benjamin against DIT.
Douglas is rather that of an atomptto e'ade or SET
aside an arbitration to which he had agreed 10 suo-
NIT. than refusal to submit to the CONSTITUTIONAL
authority of the Supreme Court of the United
States.
This difference, it will be seen, is, if not for
Mr.. Douglas, at least for others, quite an import
ant one. 1t substantially admits that so far as the
bred Scott decision contains anything IN reference
to the power of the Territorial Legislatures over
the Slavery question, it must be regarded in the
light of private or party arbitration got up to set
tie party quarrel, and however binding upon MIR.
Douglas, as one of the parties to that arbitration,
possessing no weight at all as an authoritative de-
csion of the Court within the scope of its general
constitutional powers and therefore binding upon
everybody 1t might be very convenient for MIR
BENJAMIN and others to agree to submit their prl-
yate Judgment on this point to the decision OF the
Supreme Court, and to accept that decision as de-
termnipg the Interpretation to be given TO their
party PLATFORM. They may be perfectly right IL
protesting against the thickness OF Mr.. Douglas IN
refusing to stand up to his agreement; but as TO
the Republicans wh0 never agreed to tins supreme
Court arbitration, an end might as well be put to
the charge perpetually urged against them OF re-
sisting the authority of the Court. Ihey never
agreed to become parties TO this arbitration. They
never agreed TO accept the opinion OF the Supreme
Court as binding upon them. Unfettered by any
private bargain or agreement they are fuliy EMU
| tied to the benefit of the doctrine maintained ankle
BY Jackson and by Clay that the judgments OF the
Supreme Court are only binding so far as relates
to the determination of private rights, and not Tor
the settlement great questions OF political power
| Mr. Benjamin, in charging Douglas with bad
faith in not standing up to his agreement, assumed
as a fact that in the Dred Scott decision the SUI
preme Court had denied the power of Territorial
Legislatures to deal with the question of Slavery
| UpOn this point, however, we have the opinion OF
another lawyer quite as eminent as MIR. Benz amin,
| and from his intimate connection with the bred
| Scott case, entitled to be heard with respect. In
bis recent letter to the gettersup of the Douglas
meeting lately held in this city, Reyerdy johnson
utterly denies, as he has done on previous ocea-
sions that the question of the power of Territorial
Legislatures was at all before the Court III the
bred Scott case, or was in any way passed upon
by it, Having twice argued the case on the slave
holding side, he claims to speak with authority,
when he says that the question OF Territorial
power over Slavery was neither argued, nor
in any way presented for decision. lie
further asserts that there is not word
in either of the opinions given in the
case, even tending to prove that the Court
| or any Judge intended to pass upon the
question or esteemed it before them. The only
question of legislative power raised or discussed
was: Has Congress the power to prohibit Slavery
in Territory From the judgment of the Court
negatving this power in Congress, differences
might be drawn as to the existence of it in the
Territories; but the drawing of such differences
was equally open to both sides. The passage in
the Chief Justices opinion relied upon as denying
that power in the Territories had, in Mr. Johnsons
opinion, no such meaning, and no such intention.
According to this view Of the bred Scott de-
cision, the arbitration to which, as Mr.. Benjamin
charges, Mr. Douglas agreed to submit, has never
yet taken place. The question remains an open
one, and Mr.. Douglas may yet claim to be good
Democrat, and even be regarded as an eligible
candidate for the Presidency.