Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1860-08-24
Replv.

tons, the rightful end OF controversy respect
ing Slavery in the Territories so far as we
of the States are concerned, Jm that tie tWo
positions are fatally Inconsistent Nth each
other. If the principles laid down and af-
frGed by Judge Taney and his brethren
in rendering tho Drcd Scott decision are
sound, then popular sovereignty" in the
territories so far as il affects the existence Of
slavery therein, is bubble, a mirage, II
cbimera, cheat. Slavery goes into every
Territory whenever any stakeholder sees tit
to take it there, no matter though the ten
thousand other and older settlers protest
unanimously against it. If the Federal
Constitution recognizes Slaves as property
not merely in the slave S. ales but in the
Territories as well-and guarantees TO
their owners the secure and peaceable pos
session and use of that property at least so
long as the Territorial condition is main
tained-then popular sovereignty" with
regard to slavery in the Territories is but
'the baseess fabric of vision" Mr..
Douglas attempts TO escape this conclusion,
especially in his Frecport speech, seem to
us to involve him in the most dangerous
and fatal Inconsistencies. Two rights can
never seriously conflict; and, if any slave
holder has constitutional right to plant
and maintain slavery in any territory, then
to hold that his fellow-settlers therein may,
by "unfriendly legislation" divest him Of
that right or render it practically valueless,
is to unsettle all rights whatever and prac-
tically enthrone the will of the strongest as
law. Let the Shareholders accept Mr..
Douglas doctrine on this point, and they
will find it more dangerous and damaging
than the Wilmot ProviSo.
Understand, Mr.. NJ, that we object to Mr..
Douglas two positions that they are irrcc-
onciable-that his acceptance of the Dred
Scott decision makes his "Squarter Sovcr-
cignty" humbug One or the other may
be right; both cannot be.
And now to the Republicans and Meir
attitude toward the Drcd Scott decision:
In 1897, and again in 1902, the British
Court of Kings Bench (Chief Justice Holly
pronounced the correct and righteous decs-
ion that there sis no such thing as slave
by the laws of England" Yet in 1929 the
Attorney General (Yorke) and Solicitor
General of the Crown gave written opin-
ion that negroes, legally onslavod else,
where, might be held as slaves in England
and in 1919 Yorke, (now Lord Hardwickc,
sitting as Judge, pronounced this doctrine
! from tho bench. But that did not prevent
Lord Mansfield, in the famous SomerSc
case twenty-five years later, from over-rul
ing Lord Hardwicke's decision, and declar
ing from the bench, that "the state of Sla
very is of such nature that it is incapable
of being introduced on any reasons, mora
or political, but only by positive law, whicl
preserves its force long after the reasons, oc
casion, and time itself whence it was ere
ated, are erased from memory. 1t is odi
Gus that nothing can be permitted to sup
port it hut positive law" And he there
upon, very reluctantly, pronounced the de
cision 10 favor Of the Jamaica slave Somrr
set, which has banshed Slavery ever sine,
from Great Britain, and stands to-day al
unquestioned exposition of the law o
England. We sec here, that Courts, evel
the highest, confess their own fallibility anc
amend their own errors: shall we be les
ready to overrule judicial dicta in obedience
to the clear requirements Of Eternal Right
Our attitude toward the Dred Scott de
cision is essentially that of the Republican,
of 1893 toward the Sedtion Law, afte
the Supreme Court had affirmed its validity
They did'not conspire to resist the Cour
and tho laws ministers; they resolved to re
peal the law; and they did it. So witt
the Democrats of later day in their pei
sistent opposition to United States BAN
as unconstitutional, though the Suprem
Court had adjudged it otherwise.
The people of tho United States, actinl
through the ballot box, arc tho ullimat
tribunal. They make and modify lcgisla
lures, laws, constitutions, courts. While
then, we render such obedience to tn
Judgments of the Supreme Court, Drec
Scott included, as tho Constitution anC
laws require Of us, VIC deny 10 that Cour
any Iightful authority or actual power L
foreclose the action of the people on qucs
lions essentially political or pertaining Il
the national poliey or distribution aud ~
of power What tho Court bids us do 0