New Oregon plaindealer. (New Oregon, Iowa) 1859-1866, 1861-03-15

FURNISHED IN all parts of the Union. So far
as possible, the people everywhere shall
have that sense of perfect security which is
most favorable to calm thoughts and reflec-
tons.
The course here indicated will be followed,
unless current events and experience shall
show q modification or change to be proper !;
and in every case and exigency my best dis
cretion will be exercised according to circum-
stances actually existing, and with view
and 1ope of peacesble solution Of the ma
tional troubles, and the restoration of frater-
nal feeling.
That there are persons in one section and
tanother who seek to, destroy the Union at all
events. and are glad of any ptetext to do it, l
will neither affirm or deny but If there be
such, I need address no word to, them, 10
those, however, who really love the Union,
may not speak. Before entering upon SO
grave q matter al destruction of our national
fabric, with all its benefits, its memories and
hopes, will you hazard so desperate a step
while there is any possibility that any por-
ton Of the ills you fly from have no real ex.
istence Will you risk the commission Of so
fearful a mistake?
The vital rights of mnorfties and individ-
uals are so plainly assured to them by atfir-
nations, guarantees and prohibitions Of the
Constitution, that controversy never can
arise concerning them. But no organized
law can evtr be framed with provision spe-
cialy applicable to every question which may
occur in practical administrations. No tore
sight can anticipate, nor any document of
respectable length contain express provisions
for all possible questions. Shall fugitves
from labor be surrendered by National or
State autorities9 The Constitution does uot
expressly say. Must Congress- protect Sla.
very in the Territories? The Constitution
does not expressly say,
All parties profess to be cotent in the Union
if all Constitutional rights can be maintained.
It is true that any right plainly written in the
Constitution has been denied think not.
Happily, no party can reach to the audacity
of doing this. Think, if you can, of single
instance in which plain written provision
of the constitution has ever been denied. II
by the mere force of numbers majority shall
deprive minority of any clearly Written
Constit uiional right, it might, in moral
point of view, justify revolution it certainly
would if such right was yital one. But
such is not our case
From questions of this class spring oil our
Constitutional controversies, and We divide
upon them into majoritiss and minoritics. Ii
the minority will not acquiesce the majority
must, or the government must cease. There
is no alternative for continuing the Govern
ment but acquiescence on the one side OF the
other. The minority, in such case, will SO.
cede rather than acquiesce. They make pre-.
ca1o TO NH mil in, ~ lo
them, for minority of their own will Sc
cede from them whenever majority refuse
to be control ed by such minority. For in
stance, why may not any portion Of q new
contederacy, a year or two hence, arbtrari-
ly secede again, precisely as portions of the
present Union now claim to secede from it.
All who cherish disunion sentiment are now
being educated to the exact temper for doing
this. Plainly, the central idea Of secession is
the essence of anarchy. A majority held in
restrainst by Constitutional checks and limi-
tation, and changing easily, with deliberate
changes of popular opinion and sentiment, is
the only true sovereignty of free people.
Whoever rejects it, necessarily flies to anar
chy and despotism.
do not forget the position assumed by
some that Constitutional questions are to be
decided by the Supreme Court; uor do de-
ny that such decisions must be binding in
any case to the parties to uit, or to the
OBJECT of that suit, while they arc also enti-
tied to very high respect and consideration
in all parallel cases by other departments #
the government. And it is obviously posi-
ble that such decision may be erroneous in
any given case, still the evil effect following
it being limited to that particular case, with
the chances that it may be overruled and ne.
yer become precedent for other cases, can
better be borne than could the evils of de-
flcient practice. 1t is no fault Of theirs, ii
others seek to turn their decisions to politi-
cal purposes. ....
One section of cur country believe slavery
is right and ought to be extended. While |
the other believes that it is wrong, and
ought not to be extended, This is tie sub |
stantial difference. The fugitive slave clause
in the Constitution, and the law for the sup |
preston of the foreign slave trade, are as
well enforced, perhaps, as any law can 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 le.
gal obligation in both cases, and . few disre7
gard in each. This, think, cannot be per
tectly cured, and would be worse in both ca.
ses after the separation of the sections than
before? The slave trade, row imperfectIy
would be revived without res
friction in one section, while fugitive slaves,
now only surrendered, would not be surren-
dered at all by the other.
Physically speaking, we cannot separate.
We cannot move our respective sections from
each other, nor build impossible barriers be
tween them. A husband and wife may be
divorced, and 60 out Of the presence 81 each
10 hs TSe, cannot Su
face to face, and intercourse, either amicable
it possible, then, to make that intercourse
more advantageous and satisfactory after
separation than before? Can aliens make
treaties better than friends? Can tre .tieS be
~, ~ f.skh E,11v, n,,EnvCnI hat