Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1860-09-27
Daniel Webster and Squaller Sow
ereignty.

Daniel Webster and Sqaaller Sow
ereignty.
( The following is the opinion of
Daniel Webster the great expoun.
der of the Constitution upon the
subject of Sluatter Sovereignty,
taken from asEeech delivered in the
United States Senate in 1850.
"The argument is, that by possi-
bility it may become necessary to
pass lawj respecting slavery if it
shall every exist there. New, /
suppose that the amendment proper
to be introduced for the purpose
which has been signi6eG by the gen.
tlemen who have spoken, would be
so strike out those words, and to
say that the territorial Legislature
shall have no authority 10 pass any
law for establishing or excluding
slavery in the territory. 1t appears
to me that Ibis is the upshot Of the
whole matter. That is very proper
because | take it that the meaning
Of the whole is that this question
shall be left to The people of the State
to decide after it becomes a soyer-
eighty BY admission into the Union
on the same footing With The original
States. 1t may then be question
for the people to decide, because l
take it TO be clear that it is a munich.
pal question. It is a Question for
the decision Of the people in their
Sta.s sovereignty, and there may be
q propriety-thsre certainly is no
lmpropriety-in excluding the exer-
sise of any power in the territorial
government for the establishment c:
exclusion Of slavery.
1t has been advanced that these
people, while a territory, have the
right to do anything and everything
hat belongs to the rights Of man. I
cannot conceive that they have.
We have always gone upon The
ground that these territorial govern
nents we're in state OF pupilage
lnder the protection or patronage Of
he General Government. The terri
orial Legislature has q constitution
prescribed by the Congress. Thev
lave no power not given by Congress
They must act within the limits of
be constitution granted them by.
Congress. or else their acts become
Toid. The people under the terrific
'ial government are not sovereign
y; they do not constitute sover-
,igniy, and do not possess any of
be rights incident to sovereignty.
They are, il you so please 10 denomi-
late it. in State Of inchoate govern
nent and sovereignty. If we well
consider this question upon the
ground of our practice during the
ast half century, think We viii find
'ne way Of disposing of it. 1t is our
luty TO provide fox the people of the
erritorya government to keep the
'eace; to secure their property; to as
ign to them a subordinate legislative
luthority;to assign to them a subor-
:idats judicial authority; to see that
he protection of their persons and
he security Of their property are all
regularly provided for; and to main-
tain them in that state until they
grow into sufficient importance, in
point OF population, to be admitted
INTO the Union as a State upon the
same footing With the original States.
1t seems to me that this is all our
duty. ! shall most readily concur
IN anything which tends to the Der
formance of that duty. But / can
not 60 into any general discussion
about the rights of the people While
under the territorial government.
TO do more than they are permitted
to do by that constitution which
creates government over them