The Texas Republican. [volume] (Marshall, Tex.) 1849-1869, 1860-09-29

rissr}Sl Legislature 10 e1cieas slavsr1
frsn ssid Territory. u to rs1q1oos ~
rerutsss il thessan' IAae. 80 ~
ffsnbslr, a.assdmest atsiast WHICH q
evsswhslniag nsjcsity u a. Ssses'
vetsd, iaclsdiwg oca. Cas- - ceseso'
DsaniaA 1t ~. however. ~ -
pOeSyae ~ justice 10 ssy hs voted
- ~ tkat amendment, not becausc nc
m ~ believe the Terri,osia! Leg'sls
tpss nd the power ~ exclsis slavery
from II. Territory, but hcaase be diu
po( believe il vas consistent TO decide
the auestion lesislstiyely. which thsy
mad agreed b. leave TO the Court. Gen
Csss sa.:s--
Here Mr. n quotes from Gen. Cas- TO
eLow that the South and North dincfea
about the powers that might be gwen a
Territorial Legislature, and that the
Kansas bill leIt that TO be adjud,catea
by The Court. by which alone the Constr
tusional c-.-s:ion could be settled
Finally, Nj Breekeridge continued /,
Mr.. Douglas, IN the sawc debate, used
the following language, in speaking Of
the attempt Of his eolleaguc to eoesee an
opinion out d him upon lhc question
Whether the Territorial Legislature had
the mower to exclude slave property be
fore they became STATE, said Mr..
y here read from Mr. Douglass speech u
declaration that this poiut N the Nc
Lraska bill was Judicial question
which he could not dl-cn~s, hcca Sc, ny
the bill il was referred to the Courts
Mr. Broehiurid.re continued On The
l5ih Of Nay last IN the senate, MI
Douglas said Ihcfe NJ b. read from
Douglass speech an extract concluding
with the assertion" We agreed 10 te'et
it 10 ihc Judiciary. We agreed so abide
bv their dccisiou" tlink have shown
ii a, upon the point Of dispute between
The .ricuis If TIN. Kansas biil as 10 The
powor Of a Territorial Legislature 10
exclude slave property, IT was agteon 10
refer !, Ia the Supreme conrt. and when
Il In! been lndicially dcieruincd, we
shsal ABIDE by their decision, Now
tear with me while read a sery litic
f,om the decision u the Supreme Court
Of he United States tn the bred Scott
case, Let ~ Tor moment, ,nrn TO tn.
ralm, enlightened judicial utterauce OF
tue most aeFnst iI.nnDa' upon the caFtn.
Repeated applause THIS opinion was
eonsurred IN BY al, the iadges except
two, snd was uttered by the ilius'rlous
Chief Justice o. the tnted states,
The caari says
fMr Breckenridge quoted at consider
abe l.ngih FROM the Dfed Scott decision
commenting On the points maintained III
that opinion, aud continued No", my
i.lluw.citl.ens, what is the authoritative
decision Of tho Supreme Court ct the
United States. 10 whom we agreed to re-
fer this disputed question OF ihe power
Of the Territorial Legislature They
decide that the Territories have been ac-
ouised and are held by ,hc Federal Gov
erumens, aud that citizens OF all The
3ta.ea may bold and enjoy their proper
" IN them, un,il they take on the innc.
tIona Of sovereignty and are admitted
into the Onion, nothing less 'aan State
being competent TO determine the ques
ton Of slavery OF no slavery They de-
clare that tho citizen enters any Terrific.
" with tho Constitution IN his hand and
that tho Federal Government can excr-
ciss no power over his property than slnt
which that instrument has conferred,
ard they declare that. since the Federal
Government cannot do II, still less can 1t
force I Territorial Government to exef'
else those powers which IT could not CON
fer upon any local government right to
violate That between slave property
and other kinds u property, no distinction
exists. That property IN slaves Is recog
nizcd by the Constitution OF the United
Stasas, and there 10 no word Ia that M
strumen, which gives The Congress OF the
United States greater. power over II. or
which entities that property to less pro-
lection than ether property, and that the
only power which the Congress oi The
United States has, is in guarding and
protecting the rights OF Citizens. Ian
guag- could moi make II palmer. have
heard 1t sad that the case which went 10
the Supreme Cont Of The United states
waa not the case whirh went from the
Territories, hnt cas-, which went IRON
u State, aud therefore nobody ia bound
until a case comes from a Territory,
and is regularly taken up That Is con
icss.nn, IN my opinion. We agreed ~
rcfef il 10 tho suprece judicial tribunal
upon any Gaze properly arising aud con'
INK before that august body II was
proper case. aud properly decided ny The
court. II coWfs the points OF difference
betwe, the Hi,,ids ei the Nebraska bull.
1t is candid, clear, and s,stssinanike
Now have shown you the point Of dit
ference between ns IN that bill and the
agreement between The friends OF the
bill. | have shown you the decision OF
the Supreme Court. We had arrived at
point where there should have been
harmony and poace-ep olnt agreed upon;
the only point oi difference had been dc
termiucd by the highest Judicial author
ity Of the Union. Of course, the oonsti.
tutional question was settled according
10 the agreement The opinion Of The
Supreme Court was delivered in 1851
Every thing was quiet until 1893, when
the Senator from Illinois. Nj Douglas,
was candidate for nc election from ,hat
State, and then for the iifs, time IN the
history Of America. We find the opinion
advanced that there was mode 10y
which Subordinate authorities may over
ride the highest court il the Union Iten
We Gad how the agreement 10 ab,sie W Tie
decision III thu ennrt, Is met The declara'
tiun IL ;uadc. that "a subordinate territorial
authority may contiscase ~ exclude from
NJ Territory the property Of citizens Of
Southern Sstes without regard Ia the
r. Sk...