Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-12-15


mere plurality and not majority Of the people, |
aud has resulted from transient and temporary
causes, which may probably never again occur
In order to justify resort to revolutionary resis-
tance tho Federal Government must be guilty Of
deliberate, palpaLle, and dangerous exercise of
powers not granted by the Constitution. The late
Presidential election, however, has been held in
strict conformity with its express provisions.-
How then can the result justify revolution to
destroy this very Constitution? Reason, justice
and regard for the Constitution ali require that
We shall wait for some overt and dangerous net
on the part of the President elect before resorting
TO such a remedy.
he WILL M CONSERVATIVE.
1t is said however, that the antecedents of the
President elt ct have been sufficient to Justify the
fears Of the South tha. he will attempt to invade
their Constitutional rights but are such appre-
tensions of contingent danger in the future sufii-
cient to justify the immediate destruction Of the
nOblest system of Government ever devised by
mortnls. From the very nature of his Office and
its high responsibilities he must necessarily be
conservative. The stern duty of administering
the vast and complicated councils of this Govern
attempt any violation of O clear Constitutional
right. After all he is no more than the Chief Ex-
ecutive officer of the Government. His province is
not to make, but execute its laws, and it is a
markable fact in our history that, Notwithstanding
tho repeated efforts of the anti-5avery party, no
single act has ever passed Congress, unless we
may possibly except the Missouri Compromise, i'm
pairing in the slightest degree the rights of the
South to their property in slaves. And it may
also be Observed judging from present indications,
that no probability exists Of the passage of ST. 3h
an act by majority Of bath Houses either in the
present or the next Congress. Surely under these
circumstances We ought to be restrained from pres
ent action by the precept of Him who spake as
never man spake, that Sufficient unto the day is
the evil thereof" The day of evil may never
como unless We shall rashly bring it upon our
selves. 1t is alleged cause for immediate
secession that the Southern States denied equal
rights with the other States in the common terri
tories. But by what authority are these denied?
Not by Congress, which has never passed, and
believe never will pass, any act to exclude slavery
from these territories; and certainly not by the
Supreme Court which has solsmnly decided that
slaves are property, and like all other property,
their owners have right to take them into the
common territories ard hold them there under the
protection Of the Constitution. So far then as
Congress is concerned, the objection is not to any
thing they have already done, but to what they
may do hereafter. 1t will surely be admitted that
this apprehension of future danger is no good rea-
son for an immediate dissolution of the Union.
a KANSAS REMINDER.
It is true that the Territorial Legislature of
Kansas, on the 23d of February, 1860, passed in
great haste an net over the veto of the Governor,
declaring that slavery is and shall be forever pro-
h;bited in the territory. Such an act, however,
plainly violating the rights of property secured
by the Constitution; will surely 10 declared void
by the Judiciary whenever it shall be presented in
lega! form. Only three days after my inaugu-
ration, the Supreme Court of the United States
solemnly adjudged that this power did not exist in
Territorial Legislature. Yet such has been the
factious temper of the times, that the correctness
of this decision has been extensively impugned be-
fore the people, and the question has given rise TO
angry political conflict throughout the country
Those who have appealed from this judgment Of
our highest Constitutional tribunal to popular as
sembes, would If they could, invest Territorial
Legislatures with power to annul the sacred rights
of property. This power Congress is expressly
forbidden by the Federal Constitution to exercise
Every State legislature in the Union, is forbidden
by it's own Constitution to exercise it. 1t cannot
be exercised in any State, except by the people in
their highest sovereign capacity, when framing or
amending their State Constitution. In like man
ner il can only be exercised by the people OF the
Territory represented in q convention of delegates
for the purpose Of framing constitution, prefato-
ry 70 admission as a State into the Union. Then,
and not until them are they invested with power to
decide the question whether slavery shall or shall
not exist within their limits. This is an act of
sovereign authority and not of subordinate terri
torial legislation. Were it otherwise, then indeed
would the equality of the States in the Territories
be destroyed, and the rights of property in slaves
would depend not upon the guarantees of the Con-
stituton, but upon the shifting majorities of an
irresponsible territorial legislature. Such doc
trine from its intrinsic unsoundness, cannot long
influence any portion of our people, much less can
it afford good reason for dissolution Of the
Union.
FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW 70 BE ENFORCED.
The most 2apable violations OF constitutional
duty which have yet been committed consist in the
acts of different State Legislatures to defeat the
execution of the Fugitive Slave Law. 1t ought to
be remembered, however, that for these acts nei-
ther Congress nor any President can be justly held
responsible; having been passed in violation of
the Federal Constitution, they are therefore null
and void. All the Courts, both State and Nation
al, before whom the question has arisen, have,
from the beginning, declared the Fugitive Slave
Law to be constitutional. The single exception is
that of State Court in Wisconsin, and this has
not only been reversed by the proper appellate
tribunal, but has met with such universal reproba
ton that there can be no danger from it as pre-
cedent. The validity of this law has been estab-
lished over and over again BY the Supreme Court