Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-09-28

Bred scott Decision. Delivered az SPRING.
field, H., June f2fh, 1857, and PusIish-
ed in the Louisville DcmOcrat July Cd
1851.
Kansas is about to speak for herself, through her
tuition preparatory to her admission into the Union
on an equal footing with the original States Pesce
and prosperity now prevail throughout her borders
The law under which her delegates are about to be
elected is believed to be just and far in all its OBJ
ects and provisions. There is every to hope
and believe that the law will be fairly interpreted
and impartialy executed, so as to insure to every
bona fde inhabitant the free and quiet exercise of
the elective franchise. If any portion Of the in
habitants acting under the advice Of political lead
ers in distant States, shall choose to absent them
selves from the polls and withhold their votes with
view of leaving the Free State Democrats in a
minority thus securing pro-slavery constitution in
opposition to the wishes Of majority of the people
living under it, but the responsibility rests those
who, for partzan purposes, will sacrifice the princi
pies they profess to cherish and promote. Upon
them and upon the political party for whose benefit,
and under the direction of whose leaders, they act
let the blame be visited for fastening upon the peo
pie of new State institutions repugnant to their
feelings and IN violation of their wishes The
ganic set secures to the people of Kansas the sole
and exclusive right of forming and regulating their
domestic institutions TO suit themselves subject to
no other limitation than that which the Constitution
of the United States imposes. The Democratic
party is determined 70 see the great fundamental
principles Of the organic act carried out in good
faith. The present election law in Kansas is ae-
knowledged to be fair and just-the rights OF the
voters clearly defned-and the exercise of those
rights will be efficiently and scrupulousy protected
Hence if the majority of the people OF Kansas de-
sire to have it free State land we are told by the
Republican party that nne-tenths of the people Of
that Territory are Free State men, there is no OBJ
stacle in the way of bringing Kansas into the Union
as free State, by the votes and voice OF her own
people, and in conformity with the great principles
of the Kansas-Nebraska act-prOvided all the Free
State men will go to the polls and vote their prnci-
pies in accordance with their professions. If such
is not the result let the consequences be visited
upon the heads Of those whose policy it is to pro
duce strife anarchy, and bloodshed IN Kansas, that
their party may profit by slavery agitation IN the
Northern States of this Union. That the Democrats
of Kansas will perform their duty fearlessly and
aobly, according to the principles they cherish,
have no doubt; and that the result of the struggle
will be such as will gladden. the heart and strengthen
the hopes Of every friend of the Union, have en-
tire confidence.
The moment the bred Scott decision was pro-
nounced, and before the opinions of the Court
should be published and read by the people, the
newspaper press, in the interest Of powerful po-
itical party in this country, began to pour forth
torrents Of abuse and misrepresentation not only
upon the decision, but upon the character and mo-
tives Of the venerable chief justice and his Illus
trious associates on the bench. The character OF
Chief Justice fancy and his associate judges who
concurred with him, require no eulogy-nO vindica-
ton from me. They are endeared to the people OF
the United States by their eminent public services
venerated for their great learning, wisdom and ex
perience-and beloved for the spOtless purity OF
their characters and their exemplary lives. The
poisonous shafts of partisan malice will fall harm
less at their feet, while their Juiclal decisions VIII
stand in all future time proud monument 10 theT
greatness, the admiration of the good and wise,
and rebuke to the partssns Of faction and lawless
violence.
IT, unfortunately any considerable portion Of the
people of the United States shall so far forget their
obligations to society as to allow partisan leaders
to array them in violent resistance TO the final decl
sion of the highest judicial tribunal on earth 1t VIII
become the duty of all the friends of order and con-
stitutional government, without reference to past
political differences, to organize themselves and
marshall their forces under the glorious banner OF
the Union in vndication Of the constitution and the
supremacy Of the laws over the advocates OF FAC
ton and the champions of violence. To preserve
the constitution invioate and vindicate the supre
macy of the laws, is the first and highest duty OF
every citizen of free republic. The peculiar
merit Of our form of government over all others
consists in the fact that the law instead of the ar
bitrary will of hereditary prince prescribes de-
fines and protects all our rights. In this country
the law is the will Of the people, embodied and ex
pressed according to the forms of the constitution
The courts the tribunals prescribed by the con-
sttuton and created by the authority of the people
to determine, expound, and enforce the law Hence,
whoever resists the final decision of the highest ju
djcial tribunal aims deadly blow at our whole re-
publican system of government blow which, If
successful would place all our rights and liberties
At the mercy of passion. anarchy, and violence.
repeat therefore that if resistance to the decisions
of the Supreme Court of the United States-in
matter, like the points decided in the bred Scott
case clearly within their jurisdiction as defined by
the constitution-shall be forced upon the country
political ISSUE it will become distinct and
naked issue between the friends and the enemies of
the cOnstiutiOn-the friends and the enemies of the
supremacy of the laws.
The case of bred Scott was an action of trespass,
u ct arms, in the circuit court of the United States
for the district of Missouri for the purpose of estab
fishing his claim TO be free man. and was taken by
writ of error the application of Scott to the Su
preme Court of the United States, where the final
decision was pronounced by Chief Justice fancy.
The facts of the case were agreed upon and admit
ted TO be true by both parties and were in substance,
that bred Scott was negro slave in Missouri; that
he went with his master, who was an officer OF the
army, to Fort Armstrong on Rock Island; thence to
Fort Smelling the west bank of the Mississippi riv
er and within the country covered by He act of
Congress known the Missouri Compromise; and
thence he accompanied his master to the State of
Missouri where he has since remained slave. Upon
this statement of facts two important and material
questions arose Decides several incidental and minor
ones which it incumbent upon the court to take
notice of and decide. The court did not attempt to
avoid responsibility by disposiug of the upon
technical points without touching the merits did
they 90 out of their way TO decide questions not
properly before them and directly presented by the
record Like honest and conscientious judges, they
met and decided each point as 1t arose. and faithful
ly performed their whole duty and nothing bnt
their duty to the country, by determining all the
questions in the case and nothing but what was es
sentis TO the decision of the case upon Its merits.
The State courts of Missouri had decided against
bred Scott and declared him and his children slaves,
and the circuit court Ofthe United States, for the
district of Missouri, had decided the same thing in
this very case, which had thus been removed to the
Supreme Court of the United States by Scott, with
the hope of reversing the decision of the circuit
court and securing his freedom. If the Supreme
Court had dismissed the writ of error for want OF
jurisdiction, without first examining into and
deciding the merits of Ithe case, as they
are now denounced and abused for not hav-
ing done, the result would have been to remand
bred Scott and his children to perpetual slavery,
under the decisions which had already been pro-
nounced by the Supreme Court OF Missouri, well
as BY the Circuit Court of the United States with
out obtaining a decision on the merits of his case.
Suppose Chief Justice fancy and his associates had
thus remaRded bred Scott and his children back to
slavery on plea of abatement, or any mere technl-
cal point not touching the merits Of the question.
and without deciding whether under the constitution
and laws applied to the facts of the case he was
a free man slave, would they not have been de-
nounced with increased viruence and bitterness, on
the charge of having remanded bred Scott to perpet-
ual slavery without first examining the merits of
his case and asCertaining whether he was slave or
not?
If the case had been disposed of in that way, who
can doubt that such would have been the character
OF the denunciatiOns which would have been hurled
upon the devoted heads of those illuStrous judges
with much more plausibility and show of fairness
than they are now denounced for having decided the
case fairly and honestly upon its merits
Word of Explanation.