Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-09-16

/
sThs Territory being part Of the United States
the Government and the citizen both enter it unds
the authority Of The Constitution, with their respet
tive rights defined and marked out and the Feders
Government can exercise no power over his persc
or property, beyond what that instrument eonferI
nor lawfully deny any right which it has rsserV
3D."
Then proceeding with Judicial exActitude:
"The rights of private properly have been guar
ded with equal care. Thus the rights Of prOpert
are united with the rights Of person, and placed Of
the same ground, by the fifth amendment to CD
Constitution, which provides that no person shall
deprived Of life, liberty, aud property, without du
process law. And an act Congress Of which de
prives citizen of the United States OF his liberty
property, merely because he came himself or brongh
his property into particular Territory Of the Uni
ted States, and who committed no offense arains
the laws, could hardly be dignifed with the name o
due process oflaW.
The powers over person and properly Of which
we speak, net only not granted to Congress, bu
are in express terms denied, aud they are forbidden
10 exercise them"
"And if Congress itself cannot do this-if il is be
yond the power conferred on the Federal Gov
ernment-it will be admitted, we presume, that il
could not authorize Territorial government to ex.
ercise them. It could confer no power on any TO-
cal government established by its authority, TO vio
late the provisions Of the Constitution"
Again:
| "It seems. however, to be suppressed that there il
difference between property in the slave and other
properly, and that different rules may be applied to
| it in expo1Dding the Constitution Of the United
States. And the laws and usages of nations aud
the writings Of eminent urists upon the relation
master and slave, and their mutual rights, and du-
ties, and the powers which government may ex-
ercise over it, have been dWelt upon in tAe argu-
| ment."
Bus after showing that no law Of nations stands
between the people OF the United States and their
i government-thst the the powers Of the Govern
ment and the rights of the citizen under it pos
tive and practical regulations plainly written down
and that ussges of other nations reasoning of
their urists upon the relations Of master and slave
can enlarge the powers Of this Government, take
from the citizens the rights they have reserv-
eG-
They say:
Sand if the Constitution recognizes the righ Of
property of the master in q slave, and makes no
distinction between that description OF property
and other property owned BY 8 citizen, no tribunal
acting under the authority of the United States
whether it be legislative, executive or judicial has
right to draw such distinction, deny TO it the
benefit of provisions provided for the protection Of
private property against the encroaohments of the
Government.
"Now, as we have already said in an earlier part
Of this opinion, upon different point, the right Of
property in q slave is distinctly and expressly af
frmed in the Constitution.
"And no word can be found in the Constitution
which gives Congress a greater power over slave
property which entities property of that kind to
less protection than property of any other descrp-
tion. The only power conferred is the power
coupled with the duty Of guarding and protecting
the owner in his rights"
Now, my fellew-ciiizsns, l caDnot conceive Of
a simpler or clearer judicial exposition. The
points of the opinion briefly these: Tho
\ ~
Federal Government as trustee for the States, and
the citizens Of all the States may hold aud enjoy
their property in them until they take on the fuuc-
tions of sovereignty and admitted into the
Union.
The citizen enters the common territory with
the Constitution in his hands, and the federal gov
ernnent can exercise power over his person
or properly beyond what that instrument confers,
nor lawfully deny any right which it has reserved;
and since the federal government cannot do this,
still less can it authorize territorial government
TO exercise those powers 1t cannot confer on apy
local government established by its authority, the
power to violate the Constitution
Between slave property and other property,
distinction exists; property N slaves is recognized
by the Constitution of the United States, and
there is no word in that instrument which gives
Congress greater power over it. which entities il
to less protection than other property but the only
power which Congress has, is the power, coupled
with the duty, Of guarding and protecting the
cWner in his rights.
am content to stand upen these principles, thus
announced by the Supreme Court Of the Union.
Some disposition has been manifested to escsps
from theEe principles, because the case went up
from State and not Territory; but in by opin-
ion this evasion is too small 10 be answered. The
decision We have been considering grew out Of
proper regularly carried up, and it determines
every point of difference between the friends Of the
Kansas bill.
After this discussion, we had arrived at point
where we might reseasOnsbly expect tranquility
and peace. The equality of rights CT persons and
property of all the Sistes in the common Territory
having been stamped by the seal Of judicial au-
thOrity, all good citizens might well scquiesce The
time seemed to be at hand when the sgtation would
be confined to little handful of political Aboli-
tionists, which the conservative sentiment of the
country would soon put down. Least Of ali was
any renewal Of agitation to be expected from any
portion of thoae who had agreed by the Kansas bill
refer the Constitutional question to the Court
We seemed 10 be at the end of the struggle, (as-
sumng u at the Abolition party could not success
fully prolong it, and now patriots and statesmen
might devote their energies TO the Development Of
the varied material interests Of the Union. The |
spectre of slavery agitation seemed TO be laid for
ever. But these hopes we're destined to cruel dis
appointment. Twelve months afterwards, the
Senator from Illinois, who had 'agreed to refer the
question to the Supreme Court and to abide its deci
sion," discovered contrivance by which 1t was
supposed the decision might be evaded, and rights
which We thought secure. be turned into ashes. Let
us see how it was TO be DONE
The opinion of the Supreme Court was delivered |
in 1857. In 1858, Mr.. Douglas was candidate for
reelection from that Stale and ther for the frat
time we find the theory advanced that there Is 3 |
mode by which subordinate Territorial Legisla- |
ture on q question Of Constitutional right, may |
override the opinion of the highest judicial tribunal
in the Union. The manner in which il may be done |
is pointed out in the following language, employed
by Mr. Douglas in discussion with ais competitor, |
Mr.. Lincoln:
'ETse last question prOpOunded to me by Mr.. Lin
coin is can the people Of Territory, in any lawful
way against the wishes Of sny citizen Of the Uni |
ted States exclude slavery from their limits prior
10 the formation of State Constitution? IansWer |
emphaticalIy, as Mr.. Lincoln has heard me answer |
a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that,
in my opinion, the people Of Territory can, BY |
lawful MEANS exclude slavery from their limits pri-
or to the formation Of State Constitution"
That question we agreed in the Kansas BILL to |
refer to the Supreme Court Of the UOited States
That question was decided, as have just shown
you by the Court the year before this speech was /
msds by Mr.. Douglas, in which decision they say |
neither Congress the Territorial Legislature has
power to excludes but their only right and duty are
to guard and protect. l have shown yoI that Mr.
Douglas agreed to submit the question to that
Court, and to abide by itJ decision.
quote Mr.. Douglas again concerning what he |
calls the "abstrsct question: Of the Constitutional
right Of Southern citizens to hold s0d enjoy their
property in the Territories. The question may be |
called absrAct" but it is one involving tie equali
~ CT the States Of the Union and the vital rights
Of nearly half Of the eonfedsracy. [Applsuse.
"It matters not. says Mr.. Douglas, "Ehst way
the Supreme Court may hereafter decide az to the |
abstract question, whether slavery may or may not
go into territory under the Constitution ths peo-
pie have the lawful means to introduce or exclude I
it as they please for the reason that slavery cannot
exist day or an hour spyWhers unless it Is sup
ported By local police regulations"