The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1860-04-04

of the several States, for their common use.
! The universal conviction at the South is that
we have the right to enigrate unmolested, with
our slaves, to sny territory belonging to the
United States. Seward and the Republicans
say, mo; Congress, by positive legislation,
must exclude u.s." Prominent men in the
North, some of whom act with a more healthy
organization than The Republicans, say, "No;
the territorial legsla urc, nany LAWFULLY exclude
us'-only a question about the mode of exclu-
sion, which is to be accomplished by either
process. In one event we are to be killed by
the Congressional garrote; in the other by the
more stealthy process of territorial poison
Bear with ma while to both cndeavor to ap-
ply the touch-stonc Of logic. 80 -
The doctrine of congressional exclusion is
terscly and boldly expressed in the Republican
platform, which declares that "the Constitu-
ton confers upon Congress severeign power
over the Territories of the Uuited States for
their government; and that, in the exercise of
this power, it is both the right and duty of
Congress TO prohibit slavery in the Territories.
The powers of the Federal Government are
expressed in the grants of the Constitution;
and. to authorize the exercise of power, 1T IS
not barely necessary to show the absence OF
prohibition, but an affirmative grant or a inc
cessary and proper" implication from such af-
.rmative grant What clause warrants the
inference of such supreme power? The uu-
successful search of the birds sent out from
Noah's ark typifes the effort to locate the
act clause which authorizes this gigantic claim
of sovereignty AS Mr.. Clay said of the con-
stitutional power to incorporate national bank,
it is vagrant power. Mr.. Curtis in his argu-
ment in the Dred Scott case, had been called
upon by the op osing counsel to point out the
precise clause Oh which he based the power of
Congress, and not to support an assertion OF
The power by citing the Constitution dssin'.
Their CALL, said MIR. Curtis, '.slLall be an
swercd gave them notice tn Ii my argument
will be confined to the third section of the
fouIth article" And in his elaborate ar2u
ment, as well as in his recent able pamphlets,
he confined himself TO that clause. Mr.. Ben
ton i'm his review of the Dred Scott decision,
scornfully rerudiated the idea chat that clause
contained any such substantive power; and as
serts that the Territories, rs political entities
are never once mentinned in the Constitution,
ii: d the word 'terrtory" occurring but once,
aud that property assIniiiates to other prop
erty-a as lard, in fact; and thing to be
s.disposed of-to he suld."
Most usually, however, the advocates OF
this power agree with Mr.. Curtis and the dis
tinguished gentleman from Ohio, Mr.. Cor
win I and base tie assumption upon the power
of Congress Ito dispose of and make all need
full rul. aud regulations respecting ihc terrific
nv or other properly belonging to the United
States' This clause was adopted without de
hate in the convention; and, says Judge Camp
tcl, 'was demanded by the exigcncies of AN
exhausted Treasury, and dIsordered finance,
for relief by sales and the preparation forsa!es
of the public lands" 1t was little imagined
that there WIS lurking under this apparently
Innocent vcrbiaye supremacy in Congress
over the territory arly equal to that claimed
by the British Parliament over the colonies;
and that Congress when it exercised jurisdic-
ton ever this public property, could launch
out into the slurclsss, starless of discretion.
determining the RIG hts and disabilities of in
habitants and disfi a.. chisng whole comnuD
ties of their property-rights. 1t is an asser
tioE IF the power to create and establish the
social and political system of every new State
and hence the action of the republican legls-
latures of Ohio, Vermont, Connecticut &C..
instructiny their members of Congress to vote
against the admission of new States i: to the
Union, thus concnrrirg in the recommenda
ton of the Hartford Convention, to curtail
the slave power by preventing the admission Of
any more slave States. -fF
I'm this clause. 'tcrritory or other property"
is the subject. the cnapus Of the grant. The
n, .wcr given is to make needful rules and reg
nlations for the property OF the United States.
The most common analysis of the rhraseology
shows that ''territory" is spoken of as one of
the kinds of property. If it be a enera,
abs olutc unlimited sovereign grant of legisia-
tive authority over the property, the other
clause in the Constitution giving exclusive
legislation over the seat of Government and
pl; ces purchased for forts, magazines, arsenals,
dock yards and other needful buildings, WAS
entirely unnecessary. 1t was cumulative and
specific grant of what was, in more general and
comprehensive phrase, elsewhere granted. In
the case of the United States as. Gratiot, as
we'll as in the Drcd Scott case, the judges say
that '.the term territory is merely descriptive
of one kind of property, and is equivalent to
the word land" -7. a
If the construction placed on this cause be
correct, and unlimited legislative power e con
ferred, and substantive authority for civil
government be conveyed, the conclusion seems
irresistible that Congress can exclude slavery
from every foot of the public domain, whether
in Alabama or in Kansas. whether in the States
or in the Territories. The power to make
rules and regulations" applies as well to Ter
ritory or other property in the States as in
the uninhabited wilderness. From thisSlause
alone does Congress derive the power % dis
ose of the public lands, and this power oper-
ates in as we'll as out of the States. Towards
the common Territory G ngress cannot adopt
any rule which is not common uniform to
every State and has 10 r;ghtful power to ex-
clude property recognized, by the Constitution
of the U ited States, by the constitution or
laws nf any particular State. s''+ ''''i' p
The claim of sovereign power over TIE in
habtants of the SOIL as deriVed from, the po,o-
er In dix1,ose # tie sol, ,Jor hRds or tGfrif01y
is u rc-enactment and revival of one of one of
the essential facts and constitutivc el' M nts
oe the feudal system" That system blended
sovereignty with property, ant attributed TO
the preprietors of the soii over the inlabit-
ants almost all the rights we call sovereignty,
and such as are possessed by the government.
1t ascribed to the possessor of the fef all the
rights of the public power; and the proprie-
tors OF the soil could enact laws, impose taxes
and render justice. Guizot. in his history of
civilization in France, says the feudal regime
was considered by the mass of the population
as an enemy to be ought and exterminated at
every hazard. From its origin to its destruc-
ton. from its epoch OF spendor, and at the re-
rid oe It's deorad ation and decay. the fcu dal