Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1861-03-09

Constitution itself expressly enjons upon me- Una!
the laws of the Union be faithfully executed ~ au
the States. Doing this deem to be only simple
duty on my part and shall perform IT. SO lar as
practicable, unless my rightul masters, the AmerF
can people shall withhold the requisite means, or
in some authoritative manner direct the contrary
[ trust this will not be regarded as menace, out
only rs the declared purpose of the Union, that It
will constitutionally defend and maintain ITSELF In
doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or VOL
ence and there shall be none, unless 1t shall De
forced upon the National authority. The power con-
fided to me will be used to hold occupy and possess
the property and places belonging to the govern
ment and to collect the duties no IMPORTS but be-
yond what may be necessary for these objects there
will be no invasion, no using Of force against or
among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the
United States in any interior locality shall oe SO
great and so universal as to prevent 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 Gov-
eminent to enforce the exercise of these oces the
attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly
impracticable whal that deem it better to forego,
for the time, the uses of such Offices The mails,
unless repeed will continue to be furnished IT. all
parts of the Union So far as possible, the people
everywhere shall have that of perfect security
which is most favorable calm thought and retec-
ton.
The course here indicated will be followed, unless
current events and experience shall show modlfl-
cation or change to be proper; and IN every case
and exigency my best discretion will be exercised,
according 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 another,
who seek to destroy the Union at all events and are
glad of any pretext to do it. will neither affirm or
hut ha I od6 wOrd
to them To those however, who really love the
Union, may not speak?
Before entering upon so grave matter as the de-
struction of national fabric with all its benefits
its memories, and its hopes would it not be wise to
ascertain precisely why we do 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? 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 a mis-
take? 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? | think not
Happily the human mind is so constituted that no
party reach to the audacity Of doing this thing
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
a majority should deprive a minority of any clearly
written Constitutional right, it might, in moral
point OF view, Justify revolution. Certainly it would
if such right were a vital one But such is not our
case. All the vital rights of minorities and of nd
viduals are so plainly assured to them by affirma
tions and negatons guarantees and prohibitions in the
Constitution that controversies concern
ing them.
But organic law can never he framed with pro-
vision specifically applicable to every question:
No foresight can anticipate nor any documents Of
reasonable length contain, express provisions for all
possible questions.
Shall fugitivcS from labor be surrendered by Ma
tional by State authority? The Constitution does
not expressly say. May Congress prohibit slavery
in the territories? The Constitution does not ex-
pressy say. Must Congress protect slavery in the
territories? The Constitution does not expressly saw
From questions Of this class spring all our const-
tutional controversies and we divide upon them in
to msjorites and minorities. If the mnorties will
not acquiesce, the majoriteS must, or the Govern
ment must cease. There is no other alternative for
continuing the Government than acquiescence on
side the other. If minority in such case
will secede rather than acquicsce they make pre-
cedent which, in turn will divide and ruin them;
for 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 q new confederacy, year or two hence
arbitrarily secede again. precisely portions of the
present Union claim to scccde from it? All
who cherish dsuniOn sentiments are now being edu-
20 tue Oh uOilS lHlS- Is IueGc
such perfect identity of interests among the States
to compose a new Union as to produce harmony
only, and prevent renewed secession? Plainly the
central idea of secession is the Of anarchy
majority held in restraint by constitutional checks
and limitations and always changing tlsiiy with de-
liberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments
is the only true sovereign of a free people. Who
rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or to
despotism UnanimIty is possible. The rule of
minority as permanent arrangement is wholly in
admissible; so that Rejecting the majority principle,
anarchy despotism in form is all that is left
do not forget the position assumed by some,
that constitutional questions to be decided by
the Supreme Court, nor do deny that such decisions
must be binding in any case upon the parties to
suit as to the object of that suit. While they
also entitled to very high respect and consideration
IN all parallel by all other departments of the
Government; and while it is obviously possible that
such decisions 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
ruled and never become precedent for other cases,
can better be borne than could the evils of a differ
ent 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 rreyocably fixed by decisions Of the Supreme
Court the instant they are made in ordinary ltga-
ton between parties in personal actions the people
will have ceased to be their 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 properly brought be-
fore them and it no fault of theirs if others seek
to turn their decisions to political purposes.
One section of our country believes slavery is
right and ougth to be extended while the other be-
iieves it is wrong and ought not to be extended
This is the only substantial dispute.
The fugitive slave clause of the Constitution, and
the law for the suppression of the foreign slave
trade, each as well enforced as any law ever
be in the community where the moral sense Of the
people imperfectly supports the law itself The
great body of the people abide by the dry legal OBJ
legation in both cases, and few break over in each.
This think cannot be perfectly cured and it would
sections than before. The foreign slave trade now
mperfectly suppressed would be ultimately revived