Year: 1859




the citizen that he has the right. under
the decision Of the Supreme Court, to tako
his property into Territory, if n moioritv
may deprive him of the enjoyment and
use OF that property2 There is no consti.
tutlonal right unless it can be enjoyed; the
value OF that enjoyment, it is true. NAV
be lossened by a general public policy or
by popular prejudice but | do not see
how 1t can be destroyed il is too true that
the constitutional right of the owner TO
reclaim his fugitive is, in some instances,
almost destroyed in this way. 1t is for
the Courts, and not for Congress, TO de.
eide all legal questions that NAV arise os
to the rights of slave property in the Ter
rltores; that is the Democratic policy,
but IS 1t not clear that q necessity will
never arise for the Interference of Con
gress to execute a right decree of the
Courts.


Now, sir, | do not intend to enter at
length upon the question of how far il
may be the duty of Congress to 90 to exc.
cute a decision Of the Supreme Court
against the action of Territorial Leeisla.
tnre that eXigency has not arisen, and |
hope 1t may never arise; but / do not
think the case so clear against all interfe.
renee as some Of my Northern friends I
am not for Intervention by Congress in
the popular sense; am against il; and
| concur in nearly all that has been said
by the Senators from Ohio and MICHIGAN.
as TO the political consequences of such a
measure ! deprecate, too, the precipita-
uon OF q question into the discussions of
this body which may never arise-a mere
imaginary state of affairs, the discussion
OF which must prove prcjudicial to the
Democratic paIty-a party which, in its
career OF usefulness, OF integrity, of patrf-
otism, OF success, has had no parallel in
the history of this or any other county.
have believed, and | still believe, that
the best interests of the Nation its pror-
rcss, and its glory, are closely identified
with the perpetuity and ascendency of
tins organization. Why, then, should its
ship be wrecked on imaginary breakers ?
why should it be stranded on shoals that
should never be encountered? regret
exceedingly that my friend from Missis-
sppi, Mr.. Brown should have felt re-
qulred to initiate discussion which evi-
IDENTITY can lead to no other result than
disaster to the Democratic party. Sir it
VIII be time enough to determine how far,
Congress should go to maintain the legal
rights OF n citizen in a Territory against
the action Of the local Legislature, when
the necessity shall arise. | hope we NAV
never have occasion for the discussion, Of
question of this kind for a practical end
and warn our Democratic friends from
the South, as they value the ascendency
OF the Democratic purity in the North. as
they value the ascendency of that organi.
cation which has uniformly stood by their
constitutional rights not to force unne-
cessarily an issue of this character: for the
uncalled for issue will be even more iniu
rious than would be the discussion Of the
real question.


know how prolific, intricate, delicate.
and dangerous this question is; and il
was with the utmost reluctance that
could bring myself to the expression of
any view which entertain. What have.
expressed, were the thoughts of the mo>
ment, unpreparcd and without reflection.
for | anticipated no such debate as that
we have had to-day. But, sir, preferred
to express to the Senate and to nv con.
sttuents, just what feel on this subject,
regardless Of any consequences to myself
IN the future. | do not favor the idea of
interference. The Demo-
cratic party are pledged against that doc
trlne, they ought not to entertain il now.
but does it follow that o state of affairs
may not arise in a Territory, when il
would be necessary for Congress to inter
iere, not as to questions of local policy in
the Territory, but to execute q law: TO,
execute a right that had been established
by the proper Courts. i have made it q
rule in my political career, to maintain
the Constitution Of the United States ne
defined by the Supreme Court, and shall
ever do so. In reference to this very sub
ject, the decision of the Supreme Court in
the bred Scott case, has, to some extent.
oveTruled a doctrine which | had enter.
tanned and expressed freely but saw. II
is now my duty to stand by that decision,
regardless of any peculiar views | may
have had on my own part, or of any pre-
judico may therefore encounter.


Mr. President, | shall not tresspass up.
on the Senate further am deeply sen,
sible of all the responsibilities that sur.
round this subject. Perhaps / should
1mplly perhaps | should say very much.
more in order to protect myself acainsr
Misrepresentation but care not TO iron.
bic the Senate further. Sufficient upto.
the day is the evil thereof" and fit ever
become necessary to meet exipencies SO
as those anticipated here TO
day, ! trust they may be met in a spirit OF
forbearance and of patriotism; that spirit
which will maintain the unity of the
States that spirit, too, which will main
tain the unity of the Northern and the
Southern Democracy for the sake of the
Union Of the States and the future growth
and glory of the country. ..t


/ observe, sir, that my friend from New
Mr.. Hale is exceedingly anx-
ious to get the floor, and he shall have il
in minute. | am quite desirous to hear
his musical voice on this subject. know
that he has very clear opiniops on the
question, and is not so much concerned
about tho great constitutional question,
involved; not so much agitated about the,
results to Kansas, or Utah, or cny Other
Territory but he is especially delighted
because he thinks the Democratic co,,,,.