Weekly Delaware State journal and statesman., 1862-03-21
Domrmal ann Atatesnta1l
Friday Morning. March 81. 1882.


After some delay occasioneu by
other more pressing engagements, now propose
10 pursue my argument on the constitutional
aspects Of this subject. In due time, will no.
tice some il not all of the objections which have
been urged against my views. And as ! have
said, heretofore. l will place myself right on
the slavery question.
WAS pleased to see an article in your Journal
of the 4ih inst, written by delaware" He is
Sir, ga foeman worthy OF my STEEL " Dela-
ware argues calmly, fairly aud well, did
iinyite fair criticism !" bis criticism Is fair
But he produces no authorities whatever, to sus-
tain himself; and although be reasons plansihly
enough on general principles, yet am persuad-
ed shall be able, by-and-bye, TO shew that he
is clearly mistaken aud that having assumed
uusound premises, his conclusions must necea-
sary he erroneous.
The grave errors Of those who have opposed
my views consist in seeming to forget that ours
Is limited form Of government; that the powers
which may be Iightluy exercised by the Fede-
raj and State Governments, are delegated and
limited powers controlled by their Constitutions
as the paramount, fundamental laws of the land
And ALSO in losing sight of the great objects for
which the present necessary war against the
traitors and rebels Of the South, is being waged
by the Federal government as announced by
President Lincoln and by Congress, in their
formal and solemn resolution, to the effect
"That this war Is not waged for the subjnga-
ton of the Southern slave States or of inter
fering with their State institutions; but for the
defence Of the Constitution Of the United States
;. the preservation oil the Union, ANU the ENFORCE
mont Of the lava"
ltls unnecessary to detain you, by reciung
the Powers delegated to Congress in the Consti'
tuition of the United States. or by setting forth
the restrictions imposed npon Congress by that
sacred instrument. AS | hnys heretofore re-
marked, am NOT ga strict c0nsiruotlonlst OF
the Constitution cheeriully concede to Con.
uress, the power to make all laws which shall
be necessary or proper for carrying into execu.
ton the powers'' specified IN the 9Th section Of
the lat Article of the Constitution and all
other powers vested by the Constitution In The
government of the United States. or in any
department or office thereof" But deny that
Congress, or that The Legislature OF our State,
has any Constitutional power 10 deprive any one
of life, liberty or property, "without due pro-
cess of law" Or, to take "priyate property"
otherwise than fur "pubhc use"-anj that I'M
less this "prvaIe property" be necessary for
,fpuhlic use" il cannot be taken, even Tor q
uiust compensation" No man can be COM
PEELED to sell his property-or TO part with it
only for "public use, against his own Will or
consent.
Anotber error into which the opponents of O..
s. L. have fallen, lies ia drawing presidents in
reference 10 the abolition of slavery, from the
British Parliament. IL has been iacetl0usly
said, that the British Parliament IS almost ON
nipotent il can do almost anything except to
render white man black, or black man white.
But the government of the United States Is one
of limited powers. Congress IL limited anu
ooatrolled n the exercise Of its powers, by a
written Constitution. Every thing, therefore,
not delegated, expressly, or by fair, just
Implication, is deuied to Congress-. All aigu
ments therefore, based upon precedents drawn
from The exercise of powers by the British Par
Lament, are entirely inappcable and inadmis-
sable 10 this discussion.
have shown by reference to Judge Story
commentaries Gu the Constitution Of the United
States sections 1882 1889 that " no person
shall be deprived of lie, liberty or property
= without due process Of law = means, that n,
persou shall be condemned in any of these bu
BY LAWFUL Judgment Of his peers, or by the law
the land. And thar, according to Lord Coke
than whom we have no greater or more respected
legal authority, "these words, per ffgem fsfTe
(by the law Of the land mean by due process o
law, that is, without due presentment, or indict-
ment, are being brought to answer thereto b,
due process Of the common tae
Again, .'process" has technical, legal Gig
MITIGATION. 9 PRocEssus; d pr0eedsado al inti
usoue al fRem. 1t is 80 called, because 1t pro
ceeds or goes out upon iurmer matter, eilhe
original or judicial; and hath two sgnicntions
First, Il 10 lai gely taken for all the proceeding
In any action or prosecution, real or personal
civil or criminal, from the beginning to tho end
seoondy, that 10 termed The Process by which
man is sailed into any temporal Court becaus
il ia the beginning or principal part thereof 3
which the rest is directed or, taken strictly,
ia the proceeding, after the original, heior
iudgment."-JAe: Law Dec; Title Process.
Sir VIM Blackstone regards process" 4
ntbe means of compelling the Defendant to ap
mar in coutt"-Archtol's Biz. Comm, chapt'
XIX, p. 274, edit. 1926.
Chancellor Kent snys, :" the words bg TIE Ia
Of ths land as used in Magma Cartd, in reieren'
q. this subject, are understood to mean due pr'
e.ss OF law, TINT IL, by Indictment, or present
gasS- S,sn, of good and lawful men and this, sa
Nsss.sd Coke, Is the true sense aud exposition
hose rds"-kenls Comm sect, XNlv. p.
lis manifest, therefore, that the term " d
process Of law" MEANS by legal proceedings
Court
Again: " Nor shall private property be tax
for public use without just compensation.
contend that "priyate property can OF
~ :, :, he taken for public use In II Pick. Rt
n AGO il was said by Putnam, D., priv
nroperty cannot be taken when wanted by
pnhlIo for merely ornamental purposes \
purposes must be necessary and asfiar'
IL ia true, it was held per Baldwin j., IL
Raid. Ken, 800 thai, at IL incident TO
soyereigniy of every government, that 1t NJ
take private property Tor the public use, OF
necessity or expediency of which the COVE
meut must judge, but the obligation to mt
iukt OOH pensaton is cQncomiiant with tue rlgn
Bat this right OF the government is explained
Harding VS.. Goodlelt Yerg, Al, in whlcl
Was held, that "rhe owner OF land take
subject TO the right Of eminent domain in
stale for public purposes, and tue Legislature
dsaIgpate the public purposes 10 which il II
Unless, therefore, "priyate property" be
ani.ad far pnblic USE for "pubic purpos
witch clearly means public eyoymenI-itc
~, mot be taken ct all, even for just eompeI
VA, lion. The Legislature would have, ann mas
,,i, ,isht to take my Pr'uate property, as lands,
's sshlio roads, &C., to be used by the public
x Nvine me Just compensation. But it could
81 s ssa NV lands for merely ornamental |
+ VI n . nor 10 let lie waste. SO too, if nece
* c,g ,he public use," the government
M M Am a mans horse or his slave but the
5as,enf could not take all the horses ana 81
N, Xxi state, TO allow them to roam at large,
II q, fr@As-eyen for II compensation-wit
W ~. eraus,A Of the owners Of such private
~ a ~ ,,ss War are we to be fairly met with
onIeetlon that one stubborn man, might d
the objects Of the Legislature" This is nc
objection, Il is a question OF constitut
M right in the people and OF consuinuonai
df IN and restraint of the Legislature II is Q
fIt, neither Congress or the Legislature can GO
IS y INV man 70 sell his land to another perso
( matter what the compensation may be OIL
y against The consent OF the owner, unless
e for public use," as per roads, &c.
In he case Of Allen vs.. Peien, Law
ess, il was held that "a law emancipat
eleye without the consent of his owner, is '
air one slave cannot be thus constitute
sss,nascipated" " without the consent
N owner" much less can all the slaves IN tne
W. t7 he q snanclpated" and sat free witho
g consent Of their owners"
Ii has never before been commended, that
s,sss, or the Legislature could thus int
with the domestic institutions Of the State
Ni5I1.N N 1faxinn already extended these remarks