The Oxford intelligencer. (Oxford, Miss.) 1860-18??, 1861-03-13
OXFORD, MISS, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 13, 1861


checks and limitations, and always changing easi-
ly with deliberate changes Of popular opinions
and sentiments, is the true sovereign of free
people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity
fly to anarchy or to despotism; unanimity is
impossible. The rule of minority as a per-
manent arrangement is wholly insdmissable, so
that rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or
despotism in some form is all thai is left.
do not forget the position assumed by some,
that constitutional questions are to be decided
by the Supreme Court; nor do deny that such
decisions must be binding in any case upon the
parties to a suit, as to the object Of that suit
While they are also'cntitled to very high respect
and consideration in all parallel cases, by all
other departments of the Government, and
while it is obviously possible that such decision
may be IN any given case, still the evil
effect following it being limited TO that particu
lar case, with the chances that it may be over
ruled and never become a precedent for other
cases, can better be borne, than could the evils
Of different practice. Al the same time, the
candid citizen must confess that, If the policy of
the Government upon vital questions affecting
the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by
decisions of the Supreme Court. the instant that
they are made in ordinary litigation between par
ties in personal ac'ions the people viii have
ceased to be t'eir own rulers having to that eX-
tent practically lyros gned theirgovcrnmcntin into the
hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there,
in this view, any assault upon the Conrt or the
judges tits duty from which they may not
shrink to decide cases properly brought before
them; and Il is no fault Of theirs il others seek
to turn their decisions to political purposes.
One section Of our country believes that Sla-
very is right and ought to be extended, while the
other believes it IS wrong, and ought not ID be
extended. This is the only substantial dispute.
The fugitive slave clauses Of the Constitution,
and the law for the suppression of the foreign
slave trade arc each ~ well enforced, perhaps,
as any law can ever lac in a community where the
moral sense Of the people imperiectly supports
the law itself The great body of the people
abide by the dry legal obligation in both cases
and fcy ,brcek over on each thnk that This
cannot be perfectly cured, and Il would be worse
in both cases after the separation of the sections
than before.
The foreign slave trade now mperfectly sup
pressed would be ultimately revived without re-
striction in one section, while fugitive slaves,
now only partially surrendered, would not be
surrendered at all by the other Physically
speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot re-
move orr respective sections from each other,
nor build an impossible wall between them
4 husband and wife may be divorced and 90 out
of the presence and beyond the reach of each
other. bat the different parts Of our country
cannot Do this; they cannot but remain face to
face. and intercourse, either amcabie or hostile,
mus! continue between them.
j. it possible then, to make that intercourse
more advantageous or more satisfactory after
separation than before? Can aliens make treat
les easier than friends can make lawsY Can
treaties be more fsithfilly enforced between ali
ems than laws can among fricndsg
Suppose you % to war, you cannot light al
wavs: and when, after much loss on both sides,
and no gain on either, you cease fighting The
identical old questions as to terms of intercourse
are uponyou. This country, withitsinstitutions,
belongs tothe people who intabit it. Whenever
they shah grow weary of ,hc existing Governs
ment they can exercise their constitutional rights
of amending it., or their revolutionary right to
dismcmbcr or overthrow H.
Icsnnot be ignorant of the fact that many
worthy and patriotic citizens are de>irous of har-
ing the national Constitution amended. Whilc
| make no recommendation of amendment.
fully recognize the rightfIl authority of th'
people over the whole subject, to be exercised IN
either Of the modes prescribed in the instrument
itself; and should, under existing circamstan
ces, favor, rather than oppose, q fair opportunity
being afforded the people to act upon IT,
! Twill venture to add that to me, the conven
lion mode seems preferable, in that it allows
amendments to originate with the people them
selves, instead of only permitting them to take
or reject propositions originated by others mo-
especially chosen fr the purpose, aud wilici
might not be precisely such as they would wisl
, to either accept or refuse. understand pro
3 DH~tl aifltulNcit " Nilt NOiStiAhhfoh, VIM
amendment. however, have not seen has pass
( ed Congress to the elect that the Federal Gov
ernment shall neycr interfere with tie domesh'
Institutions Of the States, including that of per
/ sons held to service To avoid misconstructioi
of wha; have said, depart from my purpos
+ not TO speak of particular amendments, SO IA
as to say that holding such provision now t
( be implied Constitutional law, ! have NO oljcc
ton TO its being made express and irrevocable.
The Chief Magistrate derives all his authoiit.
from the people, and they have conferred non
upon him to fix terms for the separation Of th
States. The people themselves can do this alone
if they choose; bat the Executive, as such. ha
nothing TO do with it. His duty is to administe
the present Government as il came to his hands
and 70 transmit Il, rninpaired by him. to his sue
ceSsor. Why should there not be patient conf
tence in the ultimate justice Of the people J
there any better or equal hope in this world ?
In ouT present differences. is either party with
out faith Of being in the right? If the Almight
Ruler of nations, win his eternal truth and ju'
lice, be on your side Of the North, or yours
the South, thai truth and that justice viii sur
II prevail by the judgmentof this great tribuna
; the American people
8 r I L l.. -