, 1860-01-06
AppendIx 10 Jndge BIack,s ObserEaIIOns

some criticisms Of a different kind which
have appeared in other quarters.
Mr.. Douglas charges US with entertain
ing the opinion that ''all the States of the
Union may cOnGscatc private property
doctrine which be denounces as a most
"wicked and dangerous heresy" He cham
pionizes the inyiolabilily of property, ant
invokes the fiery Indignation of the public
upon US for ascribing to the States any
power Of taking it away. Now mark how
plain tale will put him down.
There is no such thing and nothing like
| it on all these pages, from the Grst to the
last. Mr.. Douglas was merely aourishing
his lance in the empty air. He had nc
ground for his assertion, except most uu
authorized inference of his own from oul
denial that the power existed in the Terri
tories. The Territories must wait till they
become sovereign States before they car
confscate property; that was our position
Therefore, says the logic Of Mr. Douglas
all the States in The Union may DO il now
! What right had lie to make imputatous Oi
heresy founded upon mere Inference, when
our opinion on Tie rery point was directly
expressed in words so plain that mistake
was impossible? The following sentences
occur on page II:
"All free people know, that if they wonld
rcHain free, they must compel the Govern.
ment TO keep its hands of their private pro.
perty; and this can be done only by tying
them up with careful restrictions. Accord
ingly our Federal Constitution declares that
no person shall be deprived OF his property y
except by due process of law aud that
| private property shall not be taken fol
public use without Just compensation Ii
is universally agreed that this applies only
to the exercise OF the power by the Coy
ernment of the United States. We are also
protected against the Stale government,
by similar provision in tue State consti
tutions, Legislative robbery is, therefore
crime which cannot lie committed either
by Congress or by any State Legislature
unless it be done in fiat rebellion to the
Fundamental law Of the land"
The close Of the same paragraph show.
why it was important that no attempt
should he made to exercise such power by
a Territory:
as it not every way better to wait unti
/ the new inhabitants know themselves au(
one another; until the policy of the Terrific
ry is settled by some experience; and, above
all, until the great powers Of a sovereign
Stale are regularly conferred upon them anl
properly limited, so as to prevent the grosi
abuses which always accompany
ed power in human hands W .t... co..
Mr.. Douglas certainly read these pas
sages, for he borrowed phrase from them
and put it into us own speech. He ough
to have understood them. II be both reaC
and understood them, why did he alleg,
that this pamphlet favored the daugerou
heresy referred TOT Let the charity whicl
''thinketh no evil" find the best excuse fo
him it eau. r...
That the government OF sovereign State
unrestricted aud unchecked by any consti
tutional prohibition, would have power t,
conGScate private properly, even withou
compensation to the owner, is proposition
which will scarcely be denied by any ON
who has mastered the primer OF politica
science. Sovereignty, which is the suprem,
Iauthority of an Independent State or gov
lernment, is in its nature irresponsible anC
absolute. II cannot be otherwise, since i
has no superior by whom it can be calleC
10 account. Mere moral distractions O.
thcoretic principles of natural justice do no
limit the legal authority Of sovereign
No government ought to violate justice; bu
any supreme government, whose hands art
entirely free, can violate it with impunity
For these reasons it is that the Saxon ract
have been laboring, planning, and lighting
during seven hundred years, for Great Char
tiers, Bills Of Rights, aud Constitutions tC
limit the sovereignty OF all the government,
the old country, as well us in America
have wasted their money and blood in vail
to establish constitutional governments, i
it be true that a government without con
stitution is not capable Of doing Injustice
They knew better than that. They under
stood very well that sovereign govern
ment, no matter by whom, its power i,
welded, may do what wrong it pleases, and
bid its will avouch the deed
Now, what is the constitutional probibi
tion which can anywhere be found to restrain
" Popular Sovereignty in the Territories
! (f there be such thing there) from con
fscating any citizens property? There is
none A Territory has no constitution oi
its own; and nobody would be absurd
enough TO say, that it is governed by the
constitution of another State. VIII it be
said that the provision in the Federal Con
sttution which forbids the taking of pr
yalc property without compensation, can be
used so as to restrain q territorial sover
cignty2 Certainly not The Supreme
Court have decided, (n Barron rs. The
City Of Baltimore, Peters, 243) that the
clause referred to applies exclusively to the
exercise Of the power by the Federal Gov
ernment. The rule was so laid down by
Chief Justice Marshall. 1t was concurred
in by the whole court; and its correctness
has never been denied or doubted by any
judge, lawyer, or statesman from the times
of the decision TO this day. II, therefore,
there be sovereignty in the territories, it
Is sovaraiUntv unlimitud hv ,pu conet;tn