Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1861-03-07


perform it, so far as practicable, unless my right
full masters, the American people, shall with
hold the requisite means, or, in some authorita-
tive manner, direct the contrary. / trust this
will not be regarded as menace, but only as
the declared purpose Of the Union, that it will
constitutona1ly defend and sustain itself
1t doing this there needs to be no blood-shcd
or violence and there shall be none, unless it
be forced upon the national authority. The
power confidcd to me will be used to hold, occu-
py, and possess the property and places belong
ing to the Government, and to collect the du-
ties and imposts; but beyond what may be ne
cessary for these objects, there will be no inva-
sion,-no using Of force against or among the
people anywhere. Where hostility to the United
States, in any interior locality, shall be so great
and so universal, as to prevent competent resi-
dent citizens from holding the Federal Offices,
there will be no attempt to force obnoxious
strangers among the people for that Object
While the strict legal right may exist in the
government to enforce the exercise of these Off
ces, the attempt to do SO would be so irritating,
and so nearly impracticabe withall, deem it
better to forego, for the time, the use of such
| Offices
The mails, unless repealed, will continue to be
furnished in all parts of the Union. So far as
possible, the people everywhere shall have that
| y
to calm thought and reflection. The course here
indicated will be followed, unless current events
and experience shall show a modification or
change to be proper and in every case and ext
gency, my best discretion will be exercised, &C
cortling to circumstances actually existing, and
with view and hope of peaceful solution
of the national troubles, and the restoration of
fraternal sympathies and affections.
That there are persons in one section or an
other who seek to destroy the Union at all events
and are glad of any pretext to do it, l will nei-
Their affirm or deny but if there be such, need
address no word to them. To those, however,
who really love the Union, may 1 not speak?
Before entering upon so grave matter as the
destruction of our national fabric, with all its
benefits, its memories and its hopes, would it
it? Will you hazard so desperate "a step, while
there is any possibility that any portion of the
| ills you fly from have no real existence? VIII
you, while the certain ills you fly to are greater
than all the real ones you fly from-wil you
risk the commission of so fearful mistake?
| All profess to be content in the Union, if all
constitutional rights can be maintained. Is it
true, then that any right, plainly written in the
Constitution, has been denied l think not
Happily the human mind is so constituted that
no party can reach to the audacity of doing this
Think, if you can, of single instance in which
plainly written provision of the Constitution
has ever been denied. If by the mere force Of
numbers majority, should deprive minority
of any clearly-written constitutional right, it
might, in moral point of view, justify revolu-
ton certainly should, if such right were vital
one. But such is not our case. All the vital
rights of minorities and Of individuals are so
plainly assured to them, by affirmation and ne
| ootiafiOp Guarantees and provicionS in the Con.
stituton, that controversies never arise concern
ing them. But no organic law can ever be
framed with a provision specifically applicable
to every question which may occur in practical
administration.
No foresight can anticipate, nor any docu-
ment of reasonable length contain express pro-
visions for all possible questions. Shall fugi-
tives from labor be surrendered by national or
by State authority? The Constitution does not
expressly say. Must Congress prohibit slavery
in the territories The Constitution does not
4 expressly Must Congress protect slavery
/ in the territories The Constitution does not
expressly say.
From questions of this class spring all our
controversies, as we divide upon them into ma
jorities and minorities. If the minority will not
acquiesce, the ma jority must, or the Govern
ment must cease. There is no other alternative;
for continuing the Government, is acquiescence
on one side or the other. fla minority, in such
case will secede rather than acquiesce. they
make precedent which, in turn, will divide
and ruin them for a minority of their own will
secede from them whenever a majority refuses
to be controlled by such minority. For instance,
why may not any portion OF new confederacy,
a year or two hence, arbitrarily secede again,
precisely as portions of the present Union now
claim to secede from it? All who cherish dis
union sentiments are now being educated to the
exact temper of doing this.
Is there such perfect identity of interests
among the States to compose new Union as
to produce harmony only, and prevent renewed
secession Plainly, the central idea of secession
is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in
restraint by constitutional checks and always
changing easily with deliberate changes of popu-
lar opinions and sentiments is the only true SOW
ereign of free people, Whoever rejects it,
does, of necessity, fly to anarchy or to despotism
Unanimity is impossible; the rule of minority
as permanent arrangement, is wholly mad
Missile so that rejecting the majority princi-
pie, anarchy or despotism in some form is all
that 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
pdILlcS " d quiz do W CuC OUJCCG VI tuS1C SuiC
while they are also entitled 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 erroneous in any given case,
still the evil effect following it being limited to
that particular case, with the chance that it may
be over-ruled, and never become precedent
| for other cases, can better be borne than could
the evils of different practice. At 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 the decisions of the Supreme Court, the
instant they are made in ordinary litigation be-
tween parties in personal actions, the people
will have ceased to be their own rulers, having
to that extent, practically resigned their govern
ment into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
Nor is there in this view any assault upon the