Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-10-19
Judicial Protection .

Let few points in this canvass, to which
we have referred before, be considered.
La all the organic acts from Ohio to Wash
ington territories, from 1887 to 1853 inclu-
sive, Congress either expressly or by plain
implication retained the power of revision
over all territorial enactments 1t was not
until 1854, in the Kansas Act. that Congress
suspended that power to have the local laws
OF the territories sent up to be by Congress
and the President approved or disapproyed.
Instead of retaining that supervisory au-
thority as had been invariably done before,
Congress, not being able to agree as to the
extent of the power over slave property,
to be exercised either by Congress or by
its creature, the territorial legislature, did
agree to refer that question to the people Of
the territory in their legislature, sut5cct,
however, by special provisions giving the
right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the
U. States-That is to say, the Kansas Act
provided Gin all cases involving title to
slaves" that the owner of such slaves, inju-
riously affected in his right of ownership,
and SO affected by the local law, might have
right Of relief in the local courts and right
Ct appeal to the federal court. Senators
Hunter and Mas on, and almost the whole
South, by the votes of her Representatives
and by the concurrent voice of their con-
stltuents, sustained that signal departure
from the antecedeut policy of the government
which heretofore had invariably been to re-
tain in Congress that power of revision.
The question in this canvass is whether
the South will abide that reference to the
courts, of the right to revise and correct ter
ritorial legislation involving title to slaves
| If the right of the slave owner to have the
local laws exercising the taxing power, and
so injuriously affecting this or any other
species of property. revised and corrected by
the courts, it is the fault Of the South whose
Representatives and people so unanimously
supported the Kansas Act. These and the
like subjects ought to be attended to when
the Bills organizing territories are pending
in Congress ana before the President If
any such subject is neglected in the passage
of an organic Act. the constitutional remedy
is not protection by Congress "when neces-
sary," but it consists alone in the exercise
by Congress Of its unquestioned power to
annul or alter the Organic Act in such way
and to such extent as to secure equal rights
to all the states and the citizens thereof. in
all kinds Of subjects which are recognized as
property by the Constitution of the U.
States, but yet only so to alter or annul the
provisions of such Organic Act as not to in
terfere with the vested rights in any species
of property alread y acquired under the pro-
visions of the existing Organic Act which is
now proposed to be altered or annulled-
There is but one other way by which the or
ganic act can be properly or prudently or
constitutionally reached. This other way is
| by the court In any suitably pending liti-
CATION. The Court is competent to adjudge
and declare by its decree ,ohole Organic
Act a nullity, if that organic act proposed,
for instance, to establish an aristocracy or a
monarchy, for want of constitutionality =
Such and SO extensive is the judicial compe-
tency.
In the light Of this exposition or assertion
of the power Of the court, it will be seen how
utterly frivolous is the pretension of the Sc
ceders who support Mr.. Breckenridge and
make it the pivot ofthe pending presidential
election. They say,protection by Congress
chen necessary by some special statute of Or
binary legislation. We say, as Mr.. Doug
las says, let the Organic Act be altered OF
annulled when necessary OR proper it should
be. They say, disregard an existing or
ganic active say, abide the pledge the
South made in 1854 to refer the power Of
revision to the Courts. If there is less pro-
lection III the provisions of the existing or
ganic act, respecting rights Of property OF
any species, than there should be, it is in
the power Of the Court, not to supply legis-
lation, but to adiudge and declare that the
local law (imposing direct Or unequal taxa
ton, though not inconsistency with the pro.
visions Of the Organic AcD Inconsistent
with the Consultation Of the y. States. So,
oppressive legislation may be corrected by
the Courts, which could not be corrected by
Congress, because any superadded Act OF
Congress affecting the subject already for
litigation, would be eapost .facto. The
Court must correct the past. Congress Can
only regulate the future: and Congress car
only do Its part constitutioually by making
at first, or afterwards altering, the Organic
Act as it should be.
But the point to which we intended to cal
} the attention Of the reader. merely, instead
Of getting as far as we have into disserta
ton on our federal system as to its terrific
rial faculties by the exercise of its legisla
tive and judicial authority, is this-that th'
pretenson to Congressional protection wher
necessary, is simply ridiculous, when it il
considered that so ample and inseparable il
the competency of the Supreme Court Of th'
T. States, that if it would not sustain Law
of Congress for the benefit of slavery exten
sion into the territories Or protecting it
there, it would sustain territorial enact
ment excluding it, The Court is the South
only competent friend in our system. L
the Court is for US, it would be in vain tina
Congress might be against us. If the Court
is Or may be against US, the attempted helI
of Congress would be utterly in vain. Wis'
men and true to the democracy will cease
the strife and come to Douglas and the q
Mon.
Death OF Commodore Skinner.
1t is with deep regret we announce the
Joth of No,rroo1ora Skiunnr Hn died a.