Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1860-1862, 1860-12-07

| rIt0T1eS De QeStr0yed, anu the rights Oh pro-
perty in slaves would depend not upon the
| guarantees of the Constitution, but upon
| the shifting 1nsjorities of an irresponsible
territorial legislature Such doctrine.
from its int1 insic unsoundness, cannot long
influence any portion of our people, much
| less can 1t afford a good reason for a disso-
luton of the Union.
The most palpable violations of constitu-
tional duty which have yet been committed
| consist in the acts of different State Legisla-
lures to defeat the execution of the Fugitive
| Slave Law. l. ought to be remembered, how
| ever, that for these acts neither Congress nor
any President can be justly held responsible;
| having been passed in violation of the Fede-
raj Constitution, they are therefore null and
| void. All the Courts, both State aud 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 WiscOn-
| sin, and this has not only been reversed by
| the proper appellate tribunal, but has met
with such universal repro baton that there eau
| be 10 danger from it as a precedent The
validity Of this law has been established over
and over again by the Supreme Court of the
| United States with perfect unanimlty. 1t Is
/ founded upon an express provision OF the Con-
| stitutiOn. requiring that fugitive slaves who
| escape from service in one State to another
shall be delivered up to their masters. With
| out this provision, 1t is well-known hIstorl-
| cal fact that tie Constitution itself could ne
| yer have been adopted by the Convention. In
| one form or another under the acts of 1898 or
| 1850 both being substantially the same, the
| Fugitive Slave Law has been the law of the
land from the days Of Washington until the
present moment Here. then, clear case is
presented in which il will be the duty of the
] next President. "a ii has been my own, 10 act
I IL 49, lou
| against the conflicting enactments OF State
| Legislatures. Should he fail in the perform
| ance of this high duty. be Will then have man
Tested a disregard of the Constitution and
laws to the great injury of the people of
| nearly One-half of the States of the Union.
But are We to presume IN advance that he
will thus violate his duty? This would be at
war with every principle Of justice-of Chris
| tan charity. Let us wait for the overt act.
The Fugitive Slave Law has been carried
| into execution in every contested case since
| the commencement of the present administra-
| ton, though often, 1t is to be regretted, with
great 10th and Inconvenience and with con-
| siderable expense to the Government. Let US
trust that the State Legislatures will repeal
| their unconstitutional and obnoxious enact
meI.ts; unless this shall be done without I'M
necessary delay il is impossible for any human
power 10 save the Union. The Southern
States. standing on the basis Of the COnstitu-
| ton, have right 10 demand this act OF JUS
| ice from the States of the North. Should it
| be refused them. the Constitution, to which
| all the States are parties, will have been will
| fully violated by one portion OF them, in
| prOTi-iOn essential TO the domestic security
| and happiness of the remainder. In that
event the injured States, after having first
used all peaceful and Constitutional means
| 10 obtain redress, would be justified in revOl-
| utionary resistance to the government of the
Union.
l have purpOsely confined my remarks to
revolutionary resistance, because it has been
claimed within the last few years, that any
State, whenever it shall be her sovereign
viii and pleasure, may secede from the Union
in accordance with the Constitution, and
without any violation of the Constitutional
rights of the other members of the confeder-
acy; that as each became parties to the
Union by the vote of its own people assem-
bled in convention, so any of them may re-
tire from the Union in a similar manner, by
the vote Of such convention. In order to
justify secession as a constitutional remedy,
it must be ON the principle that the Federal
Government is a mere voluntary association
of States, to be dissolved at pleasure by one
of the contracting parties. If this be SO,
the cOnfederacy is a rope of sand, and to be
penetrated and dissolved by the first adverse
wave of public opinion in any of the States.
In this manner our thirty-three States may
resolve themselves into as many petty jar
ring and hostile republics, each one retiring
from the Union without responsibility, when
ever any sudden excitement may impel them
to such q course; by this process a Union
might be entirely broken into fragments in
u few weeks, which cost our forefathers
many years of toll, privation and blood, to
10 III
sistent with the history, as it was framed
with the greatest elaboration and care, it
was submitted to conventions of the people
of the several States for ratification, its pro-
visions we're discussed at length in these
bodies composed of the first men of the cOun-
try. Its opponents eantended that it con
fcrred power upon the Federal Government
dangerous to the rights of the States, whilst
its advocates maintained that under a fair
construction of the instrument, there was no
foundation for such apprehensions. In that
mighty struggle,,betwe the first intellects of
this or any other country, it never occurred
TO any individual, either among its opponents
or advocates, TO assert, or even to intimate
that their efforts were all vain labOur, be-
cause the moment that any State felt herself
aggrieved, she might secede from the Union.
" hat a crushing argument would this have
proved against those who dreaded that the
rights of the States would be endangered by
the Constitution The truth Is, that it was
not until many years after the origin of the
Federal Government, that such proposition
was first advanced. 1t was then met and
refuted by the conclusive arguments of Cen
eral Jackson, who, in his message of the 10th
of january, 1888, transmitting the nullify-
ing ordinance of South Carolina to Congress,
employs the following language:
The right of the people Of a single State
to absolye themselves at will, without the
consent of the other States, from their most
solemn obligations, hazards the liberty and
happiness of millions composing this Union,
and cannot be acknowledged Such au-
thority is believed to be utterly repugnant,
both TO the principles upon which the Gen
eral Government Is constituted, and TO the
objects which it was expressly formed 10
attain 1t is not pretended that any clause
IN the Constitution gives countenance to
such theory, 1t is altogether founded up
on inference, not from any language con-
tanned in the instrument itself, but from
the sovereign character of the several States
by which it was ratified; but it is beyond
the power of State, like an individual, to
Weld portion of its sovereign rights to Sc
cure the remainder" In the language of
VIZ. Madison, who has been called the
Father or the CONSTITUTION, IL was formed
by the States, that is by the people in each
of the States, acting in their highest sover-
eign capacity, and formed consequently by
the same authority which formed the State
Constitutions; nor is The government of the
United States, created by the Constitution,
less a government, in the strictest sense of
the term, within the sphere of its powers,
than the governments created by the Con-
stitution of the States are within their
several pheres. 1t is like them organized
into Legislative, Executive and Judiciary
departments. 1t operates like them direct