The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1861-03-08


such perfect identity of interests among
the States to compose new Union as to
produce harmony only, and prevent new
secession--plainIy, the central idea of Sc
cession is the essence of anarchy.
A majority held In restraint BY consti-
tutional check and limitations, and always
changing easily with deliberate changes
Of popular opinion and sentiments is the
only true sovereign of free people.
Whoever rejects it, does of necessity fly
to anarchy or despo.ism. Unanimity is
impossible. The rule Of the minority as
prominent argument is wholly inacces-
sible, so that rejecting the majorities prin-
ciple, anarchy or despotism in some form
is all that is left.
l do not forget the position assumed by
Some, that Constitutional objections are
to be decided 10y the SUPP eme Court nor
do / deny that such decisions must be
binding, in any case, to the parties TO a
salt, while they are also entitled 20 very
high respect and consideration in all par>
allel cases by all other departments of the
government and while it is obviously
possible that such decision may be errone
Gus in any given case, still the evil effect
following-it being limited to that particu-
lar one, with the chance that it may be
overruled and never become precedent
for other cases, can be better borne than
could the evils of deficient practice.
1t is duty from which they may not
shrink to decide cases properly brought
before them. 1t is no fault of theirs if
others seek to turn their decisions to poll
teal purposes.
One section of the country believe sla-
very is right, and ought to be extended,
while the other believes it is wrong, and
ought not to be extended. This is the
only suhstant al dispute.
The fugitive slave clause in the Consti-
tuition, and the law for the suppression of
the forei gn slave trade, are as well enforc-
sd perhaps, as any law can ever be, in a
community where the moral sense Of the
people imperfectly supports the law itself,
| The great body of the people abide by
the dry, legal obligations in both cases,
and few break over in each.
This, | think, cannot be perfectly caus-
ed, and would be worse in both cases after
TIE separation of the sectionsthan before.
| The foreign slave trade, now imperfectly
suppressed, would be imperfectly revised
without restriction in one section, while
fugitive slaves, now only partially surren-
dered, would not be at all by the other.
Physically speaking we can't separate
we can't remove our respective sections
from each other, nor build an impossible
wall between them. A husband and wife
may be disagreed, and 60 out of the pres
ence beyond the reach of each other, but
the different parts of our country cannot
do this. They must remain face to face
and intercourse either hostile or amicable
must continue between them. Is it posi-
| BILE then to make that intercourse more
advantageous or more satisfactory after
Sc ardtion thau before? Can aliens make
treaties better than friends can make
laws! Can treaties be more faithfully
enforced between aliens than laws can
among friends!
Suppose you 60 to war; you cannot
| fight always; and when after much loss
on Doth sides, and no gain on either, you
cease fighting, the Identical questions as
to terms of intercourse are again upon
you.
This country with its institutions be-
longs to the people who inhabit it.
Whenever they shall grow weary of our
existing government, in amending or thro'
revolutionary right to dismember or over
| turn it.
| cannot be ignorant of the fact that
many worthy and patriotic citizens are
DESTROYS of having our national Constitu-
ton amended. While l make no recon-
mendation, fully recognize the full all
thority of the people over the whole sub
ect, to be exercised in either of the modes
presented in the Constitution itself, and l
should under existing circumstances favor
either of them offered. A fair opportuni
ty being offered the people to act upon it,
will venture to add that to me the Con-
sttutional mode seems preferable in that
demands amendments to originate with
the people themselves instead of only per
hitting them to take or reject PROPOSE
tons originated by others not especially
CHOSEN lot the purpose, anu WHICH might
not precise! y suit, as they would wish
others to accept or refuse.
understand proposed amendment to
the Constitution, which amendment, how
ever, have not seen has passed Congress
to the effect that the Federal Government
shall never interfere with the'domestic in
institutions, including that of persons held
to service. To avoid misconstruction Of
what l have said, l depart from my pur-
pose not to speak of particular amend
ments, so far as to say that holding such
provisi on now to be implied constitu
tional law, and have nobody cater to its
being made express and irrevocabe.
The Chief Magistrate derives all his au-
thority from the people, and they have
conferred none upou him to fix the laws
for the separation of the States. The
people themselves also can do this if they
choose, but the Executive as such has
nothing to do with l.. His duty is to ad-
minister the present Government as it
came into his hands, and to transmit it
unimpaired by him to his SUCCESSOR
Why should there not be patient conf
dence in the ultimate justice of the PEG