The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1861-03-15

1 =
| for the time the uses OF such offices. The mails
unless repeIlad, vii continue to be furnished il
all parts of the Union, SO lar as possible. The
people everywhere shall have that sense OF per
feet security which is most favorable to calm
thoughts and reflections. The course here in
dlcated viii be followed unless current events
and experience shall show a modification or
change to be proper, and in every case and ex-
! Igency my best discretion will be exercised ac-
| cording TO circumstances actually existing, and
with view and hope OF peaceful solution
OF the national troubles, and the restoration Of
! frateroal sympathies and affections.
/ That there are persons IN one section OF a.
mother who seek to destroy the Union at all e.
vents, and are glad OF any presext 10 do i,I
will neither affirm or deny bat if there be such
here, need address no word to them. T.
| those, however, who rraiIy love the Un
may | not speak Before entering upon 81
grave matter, as the destruction of our Na-
tional fabric with all is benefits, lis memorits
and hopes, would It not be wise to ascertain
precisely what we do (? VIII you hazard so
desperate step while there is anv possibility
that any portion Of the ills you ny from hats
no real existence viii you, while the certain
Ills you ny to are greater than all the real ont}
you ay from will you risk the commission ots
50 fearful mistake All profess 10 be contentl
10 the Union if all constitutional rights can be
maintained. Is it true, then, any right pldaly
written in the Constitution has been denied
| think not. Happily the human mind is5so
constituted that no party can reach to the an-
dacity of dong this. Think il you can OF sin
gle instance in which plainly written provis-
ion OF the Constitution has ever been denied,
Ii by the mere force Of numbers majority
should deprive minority OF any clearly wit
ten Constitutional rlgat 1t might, IN a moral
point of view, justify revolution. 1t certain
ly would If such a right were vital one.-
But such is not our Case. All the vital rights
Of minorities and of individuals are SO plainly
assured 10 them, by afirmat,ons and negataas,
guar4ntees ald prohibitions IN he CONSTITUTIONS,
that controversies Geyer arse concerning them
But no organic law eau be framed with apro-
vision specifically applicable to every question
which may occur IA practical Administrator.
No foresight can anticipate, any d5cu-I
ment of reasonable length, contain express pro-
visions ter all possible questions. Shall kgi-
tIves from labor be surrendered by National or
State authority! Fhe Constitution does not
expressly say. May Congress prohibit Slavery
in the Territories The Constitution does aet
expressly say. Must Congress protect Slaeeh2
IN the Territories ! The Constitution dos hokl
expressly say. Fom qaestt,esast ihts sssIsss
spria2 all OF our Constitutional controversies,
aud we divide up.n them into rnalprtigs and
minorilieS. Ifthe minority will not ac cluiesce,
the majority must, or the government will
CEASE. There y no other alternative for con-
tb. ( E,,t
the one side OF The other. Ii a minority IN sucn
case vii! srCede rather than acquiesce, they
make precedent which ia turn wli divide and
run them; ior minority Of their own VIII Sc
cede from them whenever a maj)s.ty refuses to
be controlled by such minority.
For instance, why may not any portIoa of
a new ConlederaCy, year or two hence, ar5i-
tTarlly secrde again, precisely as portions Of the
present Union now claim TO secede from ii
All who cherish dIsunlon sentiments are NOW
being educated to the exact temper of doing
this. Is there such perfect identity oflnteresrs
among the States TO compose a new Uni)n as
TO produce harmony only, and prevent renewed
secession Plainly, the central idea ofseceSs-
ion is the essence Of anarchy. A majority held
IN restraint by Constitutional checks aGd llmi-
deliberate changes Of popular opinions and SEN
timeDts is The only true sovereign of free pro-
pie Who ever rejects it, does of necessity iy
to anarchy or TO d-spoism. UnanimIty is i'm
possible. The rule OF minority perma-
nent arrangement is wholly inadmisSable so
that rejecting the majority principle, anarchy
and desPotism IN some form, all that is lett.
| do not forget the position assumed by some
that constitutional questions are TO be decided BY
the Supreme Court, nor DO | deny that spch de-
Cisinns must be binding in any Case upon the
parties to a suit, as to the object of that suit
while they are also entitled to very high re-
spect and consideration IN parallel cases by ali
other departments of the Government, and while
!! is obviously possible that such decision may
be erroneous IN any given case, still, the evil
effect following it, being limited 10 that partic-
ular case with he chance that it ray be over
ruled and never become precedent for other
cases, can better be borne than could the evils |
OF different practice. All the same time the
candid citizen must confess that if ;he polity of
the Government upon vital questions, affecting |
the whole people, is to be irravocably fixed by |
the decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant |
they are made IN ordinary litigation between
parties IN personal actions, the people will have
CEASED to be their own rulers, having TO that !
extent practically resigned their government |
INTO the hands of that eminent tribunal nor is |
there in this view any assault upon The Court
or the judges.
IT is duty from which they may not shrink |
TO decide cases properly brought before them,
and it is no fault others If others seek to turn
their decisions to political purposes.
One section of our country believes slavery
is right and ought to be extended while the
other believes it is wrong, and ought not to be
extended. This is the oily substantial dispute