The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-05-25

you, sir, and on every good citizen. 1t must
be carried out in good faith; and all the
power of this Government-the Army, the
Navy, and the militia-all that we have
must be exerted to carry the decision into
effect in good faith, if there be resistance.
Do not bring the question back here for
Congress to review the decision Of the court,
nor for Congress to explain the decision of
the court. The court is competent to con-
strue its own decisions, and issue its own
DEGREES to carry its decisions into effect.
We are told that the court has already
decided the question. If so, there is an end
of the controversy. You agreed to abide
by it (; / did. If it has decided it, let the
decision 60 into effect there is an end of it;
what are We quarreling about? Will resi-
olutions of the Senate give any additional
authority to the decision of the Supreme
Court of the United States? Does it need
an Endorsement by the Charleston conven-
ton to give it validity? If the decision is
made, it is the law of the land, and we are
all bound by it. If the decision is not made
then what right have you to pass resolutions
here prejudging the question, with view
to influencing the views of the court? If
there is dispute as to the true interpreta,
ton and meaning of the decision of the
court, who can settle the true construction
except the court itself, when it arises in an
other case? Can you determine by resolu.
tions here what the decision of the court
is, or what it ought to be, or what it will
be? 1t belongs to that tribunal. The
Constitution has wisely separated the polit-
ical from the judicial department of the
Government. The Constitution has wisely
made the courts coordinate branch of the
Government; as independent of US as we
are OF them. Sir, you have no right to in
struct that court how they shall decide this
question in dispute. You have no right to
define their decision for them. When that
decision is made, they will issue the proper
process for carrying it into effect !; and the
Executive is clothed with the Army, the
Navy, and the militia, the whole power of
the Government, to execute that Decree
All l ask, therefore, of you is non-interven-
ton; hands of. In the language of the
Georgia resolutions, let the subject be ban
ished forever from the Halls of Congress or
the political arena, and referred to the Ter
ritories, with right of appeal to the courts,
and there is an end to the controversy.
Having shown conclusivey what the un.
Outstanding OF Congress was upon this
question of the compromise measures of
1850, and the Kansas. N ebraska bill, will
proceed now to show how the President of
the United States who signed the bill
understood it. will ask to have read an
extract from the message of President
Pierce Of December, 1855.
Mr.. Pugh read as follows:
The scope and effect of the language of re.
peal were not left in doubt. 1t was declared in
terms, to be '' the true intent and meaning of
this act not to legislate slavery into any Terri
tory or State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but
to leave the people thereof perfectly free to
form and regulate their domestic institutions
in their own way, subject only to the Consttu-
The measure could not be withstood upon its
merits alone. 1t was attacked with violence,
on the false or delusive pretext that it consti-
tuted breach of faith. Never was objection
more utterly destitute of substantial j. ca.
ton. When, before, was it imagined BY S0hsi.
BILE men, that reguiative or declarative stat.
ute, whether enacted ten or forty years ago, is
irrepealable that an act of Congress is above
the Constitution? If, indeed, there were in the
facts any cause to impute bad faith, it would
attach to those only who have never ceased,
from the time of the enactment of the restric.
tive provision of the present day, to denounce
and condemn it; who have constantly refused
to complete it by needed supplementary legis-
lati0n who have spared no extOrtion to de.
prive it of moral force who have themselves,
again and again, attempted its repeal by the
enactment of incompatible provisions; and
who, by the inevitable reactionary effect Of
their own violence on the subject, awakened
the country to perception of the true consti.
tutional principle ofleaving the matter involved
in the discretion of the people of the respective
existing or INCIPIENr STATES.
1t is not pretended that this principle, or any
other, precludes the possibility of evils in prac.
tice disturbed as political action is liable to be
is exempt from Inconvenience; but in this case
they are the result of the abuse, and not of the
legitimate exercise, of the powers reserved or
conferred in the organization of territory.
They are not to be charged to the great princi-
pie of popular sovereignty; on the contrary,
triotism of the people, exerting through the
ballot box their peaceful and silent but rresist.
ible power.
Mr.. Douglas There you will find that
President Pierce, who signed the Kansas
Nebraska act, speaks of it as adopting the
great principle of popular sovereignty"
in the States, and also in the " incipient F."
States. What did be mean by the word
" incipent" States? Not the States that
were in the Union. He unquestionably
referred to the Territories as incipient
States" and, as such, were entitled to the
benefits of the principles of selfgovernment
in respect to their domestic concerns.
Hence you find the word "incipient" States,
and the words popular sovereignty" as
embracing the rights of the people in those
incipient States, or Territories, as we are in
the habit of designating them.
Here must be permitted to comment
upon remark of the Senator from Missis-
sippi, in his arraignment of this doctrine OF
non.intervention, which he chose to call
squatter sovereignty. He said that this
doctrine had its first trial on the plains of
Kansas; that it bore its first fruits on the
plains of Kansas; and he described its legiti-
mate fruits as resulting in anarchy, violence,
bloodshed, and every imaginable evil.
President Pierce, in this message, says that
those acts were abuses of the principle of
popular sovereignty. in violation Of the
principle of the act; and that the principle
itself is by no means responsible for those
abuses. l answer that allegation of the
Senator from Mississippi by the authority
of his own chief, the President of the United
States, under whom he held the high and
distinguished Office of Secretary of War.
Nor is it improper here for me to express