Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1861-03-08


document of reasonable length contain
express provisions for all possible ques'
tions.
Shall fugitives from labor be surren.
defed by National or by State authority
The Constitution does not expressly say
Must Congress project slavery in the
Territories ? The Constitution does not
expressly say.
From questions of this class spring
all our constitutional controversies, and
we divide upon them into majorities and
minorities. If the minority will not ac-
quiesce, the majority must, or the gov,
eminent must cease. There is no other
alternative for continuing She govern
ment but acquicscence on one side or the
other.
SECESSION A TWO-EDGED SWORD.
If a minority in such q case will Sc
cede rather than acquesce, they make a
precedent which in turn will divide and
ruin them, for minority of their own
will secede from them whenever major
ity refuse to be controlled by such mi
nority.
For instance, why may not any por-
ton of a new confederacy year or two
hence arbitrarily secede again, precisely
As a portion of the present Union now
claims to secede from it? All who cher
ish disunion sentiments are now being
educated to the exact temper Of doing
this. Is there 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 es-
sonce Of anarchy.
A majority held in restraint by Con-
stitutioual checks and limitations, and
always changing easily with the deliber-
ate changes OF popular opinion and sem
timent, is the only true sovereign of a
free people. Whoever rejects it does
of necessity fly TO anarchy or to despot-
ism, Unanimjty IS impossible. The
rule of a minority, as permanent ar
rangement, is wholly inadmissibIe; so
that rejecting the majority principle, an
archy or despot,sa- in some form is all
chat is left.
THE SPHERE OF THE SUPREME COURT.
( I 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 parties to
a suit, as to the object of that suit; while
they are also entitled to very high re-
spect and consideration in all parallel
cases by all other departments of the
government. And while it is obviously
/ possible that such decision may be erro-
neous in any given case, still the evil eff
feet following it being limited 10 that par
/ ticular case, with the chance that it may
+ become q precedent for other cases, can
better be borne than could the evils Of a
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 irreyocably fix
ed by the decisions Of the Supreme
Court, the instant they are made in ordi-
nary litigation between parties in person
al actions, the people will have ceased
to DO their own rulers, having to that ex-
tent practically resigned their govern
ment into the hands of that eminent tri-
/ bunal. Nor is there in this view any
assault upon the Court or the Judges.
1t Is a duty from which they may not
shrink, to decide cases Of property
brought before them, and il is no fault of
theirs if others seek to turn their decis-
ions to political purposes.
THE REAL DISPUTE.
One section Of our country believes
slavery is right md ought to be extended
while the other believes it Is wrong and
ought not to he extended. This is the
only substantial dispute. The fugitive
slave clause IF the Constitution and the
law for the suppression Of the foreign
slave trade, are each as well enforced
perhaps a3 any laws can ever be ia a
community where the moral sense OF tho
people imPer.ec.iy supports the law it.
self, The great body Of the people
abide by the dry legal obligation in both
cases, and a few break over in each
This, | think, cannot be perfectly cured,
and it would be worse in both cases after
separation Of the sections than Lefore.
The foreign slave trade, now imperfectIy
suppressed, would be ultimately revived
without restriction in one section, while
fugitive slaves, now only partially sur
rendered, would not be surrendered at
all by the other.
SEPARATION IMPOSSIBLE.
Physically speaking, we cannot sepa-
rate; we cannot remove our respective
sections from each other, nor build an
impossible wall between them. A hus-
band and wife may be divorced and 90
out Of the presence and beyond the reach
of each other, but the different parts Of
our country cannot DO this they cannot
but remain face to face, and intercourse
either amicable or hostile relations
must continue between them
Is it possible, then, to make that inter-
course more advantageous or more sat |
islactory after separation than before
Car aliens make treaties easier than
friends can make laws? Can treaties be /.
more faithfully enforced between aliens
than law can among friends Suppose .
you go to war, you cannot fight always
and when, after much loss on both sides, /
and no uain on either Won cease 6uhtinu /