The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1864-08-26
was pro-slavsry party. They were and
are always ready to hail emancipation in

-
peaceful and legal way, and to acquiesce
in the extinguishment Of slavery as one of
the legitimate consequences of a protract-
ed rebellion. 1t is not their love Of S2aoe-
ry, but their looe Of Liberty, the Consti-
tuition and the Union, which induces
them to oppose the emancipation policy of
the Administration. They see in that
policy as illustrated in the Presidents
emancipation proclamation, his plan Of re-
construction and the acts Of Congress on
the subject, an overturning and reversal
OF the principles which form the founda-
tons of our system of government In
that system the people, acting through
their State organizations, adopted the
Constitution Of the United States, grant
ing certain powers to the United States
and expressly reserving all other powers
to themselves or to their State govern
nents. 1t was optional with each State
TO adopt the Constitution or not. Some
Of them did not adopt it until after it had
been put n operation over the States
which had adopted it. In the meantime,
the dissenting States were, in every sense
of the word, independent nations. And
they would have remained such unto this
| day, had they not subsequently adopted
the Constitution and come into the Union.
In so doing they surrendered certain
portion Of their sovereign powers, bit re-
se,'0e0 oil The rest. In the exercise of
their reserved powers, thesStates are just
| as sovereign as they ever were-just as
sovereign as the United States in the exer-
else of the granted powers. We live un-
der two sovereigns, each as absolute with
in the scope Of its own powers as two ma
tons occupying two distinct and well de-
| fined territories.
Legitimate State Rights are composed of
they respectively assented to the Consti-
tuition. Among them, palpably and I'M
deniably, is the power to regulate the re-
lations between man and wife, parent and
child, master and apprentice, master and
servant, bond or free. Has the United
States power to regulate marriage settle
ments or grant divorce within the States !?
Can Congress or the President, under any
pretext, free the child from his parent CT
the apprentice from his master? What
would the country think if the President
were to issue proclamation declaring all
boys free from their parents at the age of
sixteen, and p.edging the military power
of the Union to support them in the asser-
ton Of their liberty? 1t would be an in
tolerable violation of individual and State
| rights, but no more unconstitutional than
q proclamation purporting to free the SER
want, bond or free, from the lawful au-
thority of his master
| But it IS said that the Southern rebels
have forfeited all the rights under the
Constitution and laws What if they have
DOES that release the President from his
obligation to the Constitution and the laws
in dealing with them? Is there any prin-
ciple recognized in our system of govern
ment which can justify him in booming
judge, jury and executioner, depriving
even notorious criminals Of property, if
not Of life, without the Intervention of the
courts Of justices
But the assumptions of the President in
this and other matters are justified upon
the plea Of the "war power" and the
President himself claims the right to do
anything which he may think will aid him
in suppressing the rebellion, the Constitu-
ton notwithstanding. Ihave scarcely pa
tience, Sir, to discuss a proposition so
mOnstrous and 80 absurd. We live under
Constitution made for war as well as
peace; but upon this theory it is virtually
suspended as soon as war occurs, and the
President becomes Dictator, with all the
powers of an absolute monarch. Upon
this theory no man in the Unised States
now enjoys liberty and property under
any other tenure than the will of Abraham
Lincoln. If he should take it into his
head that it would conduce to the success
Of the war, he could, in his own opinion,
rightfully seize, not only the property Of
every man, loyal and disloyal, and all his
SONS capable of bearing arms, but also his
wife and little ones. We have already
seen this power exercised to q most alarm
ing extent.
We see it in the unreasonable searches
and seizures Of persons and papers, in d.
rect violation of the Constitution.
In arrests Of obnoxious individuals and
their Imprisonment without warrant or
charges preferred, and in some instances
cut off from all communication with fami-
ly, friends or counsel.
In the suppression Of newspapers and
wantOn arrest OF editors.
In kidnapping and sending out of the
country foreigner in violation not only of
our laws, but of the international laws of
the whole civilized world.
In the assumption by the President of
the power to regulate the right of suffrage
in the States, and establish minority and
aristocratic governments under the pre-
text Of guaranteeing republican govern
ments
In imposing illegal and degrading oaths,
treating loyal men as rebels, and insult
ing them with the alternative of giving up
either their slave property or their right
of suffrage.
In using the army to drive legal voters
from the polls and secure the election of
the partisans of the men in power.
Why, sir, under this tremendous "war
power as ascertained and practiced upon,
the President may not only use the army
to secure his own reelection, but may
overthrow all State Governments, turn
Congress out of doors and abolish the Con-
stitution! Why NOTE Has he not already
subverted the Constitution in many essen
fIQI norficuloro L. ,e&