Litchfield enquirer., 1861-03-07

affirm or deny. But II there De such neeu au . dress no word to them. To those, however, who
 really love the Union, may not speak. Before
 entering upon so grave matter as the destruc
 ton of our national fabric with all it's benefits
 its memories and it's hopes, would 1t not be wei
 to ascertain why we do it. Will you hazard SC
 desperate step while there is any portion of th'
 ills you Hy from have no real existence? Will
 you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater
 than all the real ones you fly from?
 Will you risk the commission of so fearful {
 mistake All profess to be cantented in th'
 Uaion, if all Constitutional rights can be main
 tained. Is 1t true, then, that any right plainly
 written Tn the Constitution has been deniedl
 think not. Happily the human mind is so con
 structed that no party can reach to the audacit,
 of doing this. Think, if you can, of single in
 stance in which plainly written provision o
 the Constitution has ever been denied. lf bJ
 the mere force of numbers, majority should
 deprive minority of any clearly written consti
 tutlonal right, it might, in moral point of view justify revolution-certanly would, if such right
 were vital one. But such is not our case
 All the vital rights of minorties and individ-
 uals are so plainly assured to them by affirma- tlons and negations, guaranties and prohibitions In the Constitution, that controversies never arise concerning them. But no organic law can
 ever be framed with provision specifically ap- piicable to every question which may occur ID practical administration. No foresight can ah .i ticipate nor any document of reasonable length contain express provisions for all possible ques- tiors Shall fugitives from labor be surrender cd by National or State authority? The Con stitution does not expressly say. Must Congress protect Slavery in the territories? The Con stitution does" not expressly say. From the questions of this class spring all our constitu- tional controversies, and we divide upon them in- to majorities and minoiities.
 If the minority will not acquissce the majority must, or the Government nust cease. There is no alternative for continuing the Government but acquiescence on the one side or the other- If 6 minority in such case will secede rather taan acquiesce, they make precedent which in tarn will ruin and divide them, for a minority Of their own will secede from them whenever ma lority refuses to be controlled by such minor ity.
 For instance, may not any portion of g new eonfederacy, year two hence, arbitrarily eede again, precisely ss portions Of the present Union, noF clsim to eecede from it? All who cherish disanion sentiments are now being edu- eetea to the eI2et temper of doing this. Is there such perfect idcnity Of interests among tie States to esnpose pew Union as to produce harmony only and prevent renewed secession? Plainly. ike eestrsi idea of secession is the es- se4ee Of anarchy.
 4 majority held in restraint by constitutional cheek EdiiRiitst.0ns, and always changing easi- y with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is tEe only true sovereign ci free PeOPie- Whoever rejects ii, does, cl nccess- Isy, fy 50 anarchy or to- despotism. Cn4aii4ity IS I@POssibie. TEe rule of ] minority as per E.nent arrangement, is wholly inad.tissiblo
 sS tks', rejecting tbe majority plin ;ip.e, an- srehy CT despeiisa ia some form is all that is i=ft- do not forget the position assumed ! y some that constitutional questions to be ,ls sided by the Supreiaa Court, Tor do I dcny ! t such decisions musi be binding in any case upon tae parties to suit, 10 the object of tE@t sut, vAile they arc also eDtiiisd to very high respect and consideration in sll parallel c&sas hy al other Departments Of the Goyernuent and willie II Is obviously possible thst such decision may os errOHeeuS III any given ccSe s!i!i the evil f. fec, lowing II being limited to that ptr icular case, with the chance thz; it may be oyorru.e1 Az. never beco.ce precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could tie evils of d:i- terent practice II tie same t.iae tAo canIli citizen must confess, that ifthe polio; of Ii c G9vs-nsIeaI Ip1l ihc vital questions affecting the Ei-o.c rerEl-, is IU be irrcyucably fxsu by tilcdsei-iCns fthe Supreme Cour the instant tie, are n .is iH ordinary litigation between parties ie personal sc;ioIs, the peo!,; wil have ceased 10 be sac.r sEn rulers, l4rin.. 10 that extent practically resigned l5ei: Government into tle hands CT that eiaiIseEi tribunal. Nor s tt.re la this yi-S say sssaal: upon tic Court or the jai-es.
 l. IS Luiy from which !iey may not shrink to dee:ae eases Of rTop..ty brought b,fJic tLen, and II s fauii o: theirs if others sock to tll Iaeir dec;sios.s te Po!.t:cal purposes. Che sec t;va Of cEE' country believes Slavery is right ad he ekieutel. while lhc oh CT believes itis wrong, and oughr Uci to be extended
 This is the only substantial dispute in tf.e Fugitive Slave cla-se of tue Crnsti ution: and the laws for the suppression of the foreign Slave trade are each as "eii enforced pcrh IDS, as any 1as esn ever be in community wuere the moral eease o: the people iIapcrfectly supports the law itseIE
 TEs great body of the people abide by the dry legal obligation in both eases, and few break oser in each. This, think, cannot De perfectly eurei, and 1t would be worse in both cases after the separation of the sections than before The foreign Siave-iraic, naw !ilperieciIy -uppres sel would be ultimately r.yivel, ,.iIkoat restrict on in section. while ijagiiiye slaves HOW only partially surrendered, would not be surrendered st all by the ether.
 Physically speaking we cannot serarate-we cannot remove respective sections from each O:hcr, nor buili an Impossible wall between them.
 husband and wife may be divorced. and 20 cut of the presence and tey onI he reach of each o'aer-bIt the different. parts Of our country can- not do this.
 lHeg eaHaot cst reIaia lace to lace, and ia- tercsurse either aixicss.e or hostile must con tinas between taeSa- Isit possible then to make that intercourse more advantageous or more sa- hSfact0Ty after separation than before? Gan aliens make treaties easier ih1n friends can m ke lawsg Can treaties be mere faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends!
 Suppose you go 10 war, you cannot fight al ways. and when. after much loss On both sides aad nc gan 0l either. You cease fiahtng the identical questions to terms of intercourse are again aPon you This country, with its institu- ticrs. belongs to the people who inlabit t. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their Con tit tionai right Sf amending or their revolutionary rsht to cismeiaber Or overthrow it. cannot be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the Ma tionRl Constitniion amended. While nuke no recommendation of amendment. I lui!vrecoynize the iall aHtkoTity of the people over the whole subject to be exercised ill either of the modes prescribed in the inshQmeut itself, and should under existing circumstances favor rather than oppose fair opportunity being afforded the peo- pie to act upon it.
 NIil venture to add that to me the Conven. ns1 mode seems preferable in that it allows amendment ts originate with the people them selves. instead Ot only permitting them to take or relect propositions originated by others not especially chosen for the purpose. and which might not be precisely snch as they woulJ wish either to accept or refuse. I understand a nro. posed amendment to the Constitution. which amendment, however. have not seen, has mass. ed tOu~raSS fo ina ,l.,