Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-07-18
extracts from a speech delivered BY
uor. rnrzx Q. RREuKINfsfhGE,
In Tie Hall If he House of Representatives ut Fdhs
fort, December ri, 1850.

m fe Hall Of the House Of Representatives. ~ ffdte
fort, December II, 1850
On Sunday. the 18th day Of December, only the
Law before the election of Senator occurred, re-
,e;ve1 At Washington a letter signed by number of
members of the Legislature, asking my views toucii-
ng the bred Scott decision, territorial sovereignty
and the duty of Congress in reference to pf1sate
Droperty in the Territories. | received that
eter with the profound respect due to the position
and character Of its authors and if time had allow
ed would have answered it before the day hxeo "
law for the election Your action, however, IN al
vance of an answer was an expression of confl-
de1ce In me which cherish with just PRIDE nave
not for a moment thought of sheltering myseA De
hind an election and indeed it was of little conse
ouence whether the undergraduates were answered
6efore or after the election for am of that school
which holds the doctrine of Instructions, ana wnell
ever my convictions will not allow me TO receive
and obey the instructions of the state, shan pe
ready to give back the trust conndeo 70 ny nA +
: Gentlemen. l accept the decision OF the ouprems
Court of the United States every question WithA
its jurisdiction, whether it corresponds Win iuy
private opinion or not accept II tne more III
diay when as in the case OF Dred ccote II aceolSs
with nv convictions. approve the opinion Oh Tue |
Sunrame Court in that case, in all its paris, as
sound exposition Of the. Constitution ana the raw,
and of the relations Of the black race 70 tne w..e
race under our political system indeed so sSilel[
ous was that the principles and reasoning oi uiat
oninion should be understood and sustained IN
Kentnckv. that L printed and circulated large
edition through the State, and there IS scarcely
member of the General Assembly VINO mas NOT re-
ceived copy under my frank.
~, onnrove the opinion of the court in that case
,vonld seem to settle the question OF territorial
Sovereignty, as think viii presently appear
brief review of the action OF Congress on the Ter
rtorial question for some years Delore That cele-
brated opinion was rendered, VIII show the manner
in which the legislative department supposed Inc
question of slavery in the Territories could come
! properly before the courts, ,,..,.-
was in Congress when the Missouri Inc was re-
naaled After the refusal of majority IN Congress
r. settle the disractng question of slavery by the
extension of that line to the Pacific Ocean, winch
obnoxious as it was to the Southern States, they
! were Eiiling to accept, never would nave FOtsu
for the territorial organization OF Kansas anu ne-
| bras-a while that ooious stigma renamed on the
statnte hook voted cheeFfnlly for its repeal, but
| without rejecting on the motives of the patriot
statesmen who acuuieseed in its establishments Inc
abolition OF duasi-abolitOn party asserted the right
and duty of Congress tS1excL4de slavery rom .le
| Territories of the Union The peWocratle party
sustained in this respect by most OF the opposition
/ from the South held the opposite OPINION ouR Cd
| iect was if possible, 10 withdraw the ques9op Of
| Slavery from the halls of Congress, ana place II
where il could no longer disturb the pnDc tranquil
itv Its nerpetual agitation the federal theatre
| distracted the country and threatened the pubic
| safety Our purposes were patriotic and peaceful,
1 though unhappily they have not been reanZed' IN
pursuance of these purposes: a la" was PASseu "
| containing among other features, the declaration
that 1t was the intention of Congress neither 10 leg
islate slavery into those Territories nor to eXcuue
it therefrom, but to leave the people perfectly free
| to form and regulate their domestic institutions In
| the4 own way subject only to the Constitution OF
the limited States What limitations the Constitution
imposed on the freedom of Territorial action IN re-
gard to slave property under this Delegation OF po"
| er by Congress was point OF oilefeheS Det"eeh
the friends Of the measure.
| A considerable portion of the Northern Democra-
| CIV held that slavery was IN derogauon OF cohhoh
right and could only exist by force OF POSITIVE law
and they denied that the constitution furnished ls
law for the territories. The representatives Oh the
South with few exceptions held that TIE cItlzens OF
tito United States might enter the common territory
with whatever was recognized oy NE CONSTITUTION
| as property and ENJOY ii there Ths dld not sesr
To be denied a. TO any description of property eX-
rent African slayss This question Stoned to be ju-
dical In its chaFaeteY at any rate, the friends Oh
the bill agreeing not to make it the subject OF egls
lative conflict inserted provision tGIt any question
of title to slave in the territories llgnt DC CAT
ried up to the Supreme Court OF the pnltee staIes
without regard to the value of the MISTER "a cpq-
| tpoyersv and with the understanding that Whatey-
er the judicial decision might be- 1t should De Dlnu
ing all parties, not only by virtue OF me agree
ment but under the obligation Of every citizen IN
respect the authority of the legally constituted
courts Of the country.
II was under circumstances, bsfore the question
had been determined by the courts, and Wnlle tne
that the country was thrown upon the Presidential
election Of 1856 1t became my duty at the request
of my political friends to visit the States OF Ohlo
Indiana Michigan and Pennsylvania, and to address
the peoples and avail Wyseif OF TINS occasion 70 ue
clare that in all these States proclaimed the same
principles which have eyeP uttered IN the common
| wealth of Kentucky, and am ready 70 utter AGAIN
1t had been charged that the Democratic parry ne-
sired to employ the Federal GoVernmenl 10 prVPS-
gate slavery. denied it 1t had been charged that
the Democratic party not content with the guaran-
tees of the constitution, had erected Itself INTO
great pro-slayepy organization. denied it, and de-
claIed that the national Democracy was neither
| pPOslayery anti-slaYePy parry out was cohsI-
tntonaI PARTY; and repeat the declaFaton here to-
night. ] argued earnestly against the Pe4eE&l III
Congress of agitation upon the question OF slavery
in the territories, By the Kansas bill the people
were left free to mould their institutions suDlect
only to the constitution. How Tar the constitution
| would restrain their action in regard 10 private
| property during the territorial condition, was
question which by the same bill had been spoRlteq
to the Supreme Court, and it was not doubted that
| Governments and citizens alike would respect and
| obey the judicial authority of the Union SO that
pon-inteFterence, tranquility and peace were conn
IDENTIFY anticipated by the friends OF liberty and Or
der Very well; the Presidential contest passed by,
and soon afterwards the Supreme Court OF the UNI
ted States decided the question which had been the
subject of legislative dispute; not indeed upon
case from Kansas, but upon one from missouri
Without following the reasoning OF the court CON
tent myself VIII 4uOtAlo SOS4hSAOtA fN0tSf
that august tribunal:
ITpon these considerations tits the opinion of the
court that the act of Congress which prohibited
| citizen from holding or owning property 81 ulis
kind in the territories of the United States north OF
the line therein mentioned, is not warranted IN the
| constitution and is therefore, void; that neither
/ bred Scott himself, any OF his family, were
made free by being carried into this territory even
if they had been carried there by the o8ner, Win
| the intention of becoming permanent Pesidelt-
| Auaiu Tho DeISOn and properly,
of which we speak are not only not granted to Con
gress but are in express terms Denied anu tey are
forbidden to exercise them and this pronblnon Is
not confined to the States but the words are general
| and extend to the whole territory over which the
constitution gives it power to eglslate, including
those portions of it remaining under terrtoFiS gov
| eminent, well as that covered by States It's
| total absence of power every where wlthln the
dominions of the United States and places the ct
zens of territory, far those rights are CON
| cerned on the footing with cltlZeIs OF tile
States, and guards them firmly and plainly
| against any inrOads which the General Government
might attempt under the pleas implied or inciden
tai pOFeys And If Congress itself cannot do this
if it beyond Ge powers conferred on the Federal
1 Governments wiz BE admitted presume, that
it could not authorize a territorial government to
| exercise them. 1t could confer 20 power on any
local government, established by it's authority to
violate tbe provisions of the constitution"
| The court dReW no distinction between slaves and
| other property. The distinctions drawn by some
feregn writers hays nOf1ng 70 DO with our Pontlca
system Our government rests not on the specula-
lions of philanthropic writer's but on the plain Ian
guage of written constitution. Hence, we are not
to look the supposed analoges of the laws Of ma
\ lions, but are to regard the Constitution alone,
which is the written expression of the respec-
tive powers Of the government and of the rights OF
the States and the people The rights of person and
property and the absence of power in Congress or
in suboFdipGte governments created by Congress to
destroy or impair them much enlarged upon and
enforced throughout tie opinion, the whole tone
and spirit of which accord with che extracts already
| read. I'D.
The fact that neither Congress nor tePPitsrisl !
legislature can eonshtutiopally exclude from, or
eonfscate in a territory, private property, having
been iudicially determined by the highest court in
the United States confess that did not anticipate
the doctrine Of Enfrlepdly territorial legislation in
regard to African slaves. = has no warrant from
the Constitution if we recognize tee highest Judicial
Interpretation Of that instrument.
In smother part of the same opinion the supreme
GoEr points out the duty of the Judicial department.
in It's pEoper sphere-tO maintain the constitutional
rights Of the citizen in bis person and property In
speaking Of the acquisition Of territory, they pro
p9unce it political question ana tAsq holc the fol
| loving language