Year: 1860

formity with its express provisions.


How then can the result justify a rev.


olution to destroy this very Constitu-
ton? Reason, justice and regard for
the Constitution all require that we
shall wait for some overt and danger
GUS act on the part of the President
elect before resorting to such reme-
dy. 1t is said, however, that the ante
cedents of the President elect have
been sufficient to justify the fears of
the South that he will attempt to in
wade their Constitutional rights; but
are such apprehensions of contingent
danger in the future sufficient to Justify
the immediate destruction of the no.


blest system of Government ever de-
vised by mortals? From the very ma
ture of his Office and its high response


bilities he must necessarily be conser-


vative. The stern duty Of administer
ing the vast and complicated councils


of this government affords in itself a
guarantee that he will not attempt any


violation of clear Constitutional right.


After all he is no more than the Chief
Executive officer of the Government


His province is not to make but exc


cute its laws, and it is remarkable fact


in our history that, Notwithstanding the


repeated efforts of the anti-slavery par


ty, no single act has ever passed Con-


gress, unless we may possibly except


the Missouri Compromise, impairing in


the slightest degree the rights of the


South to their property in slaves. And


it may also be observed, judging from


present indications that no probability


exists of the passage of such an act by


majority of both Houses either in the


present or the next Congress. Surely


under these circumstances we ought to


be restrained from present action by


the precept of Him who spake as never


man spake, that, Sufficient unto the


day is the evil thereof" The day of
evil may never come unless we shall


rashly bring it upon ourselves. 1t is


alleged as one cause for immediate Sc


cession that the Southern States are


denied equal rights with the other


States in the common territories. But


by what authority are these denied


Not by Congress, which has never


passed, and / believe never win pass,


any act to exclude slavery from these


territories; and certainly not by the


Supreme Court which has solemnly de-


cided that slaves are property, and, like


all other property, the owners have a


right to take them into the common


territories and hold them there under


the protection of the Constitution. So


far then as Congress is concerned, the


objection is not to anything they have


already done, but to what they may do


hereafter. 1t will surely be admitted


that this apprehension of future dan


ger is no good reason for an immediate


dissolution Of the Union.


1t is true that the Territorial Legis-


lature of Kansas, on the % of Febru-


airy, 1860, passed in great haste an act


over the veto of the Governor, declar-


ing that slavery is, and shall be forev-
er prohibited in the territory. Such


an act, however, plainly violating the
rights of property secured by the Con-


stitution, will surely be declared void


by the Judiciary whenever it shall be
presented in legal form. Only three


days after my Inauguration, the Su.


preme Court of the United States SOL


emnly adjudged that this power did
not exist in a Territorial Legislature.
Yet such has been the factious temper


of the times, that the correctness of


this decisions has been extensively i'm.
pugned before the people, and the


questions has given rise to angry polit-


ical conflict throughout the country.
Those who have appealed from this
J judgement of our highest Constitutional
tribunal to popular assemblies, would,
) if they could, invest Territorial Legis,


latures with power to annual the
sacred rights of property. This power
Congress is expressly forbidden by
the Federal Constitution to exercise
Every State legislature in the Union
is forbidden by its own Constitution to
exercise it. 1t cannot be exercised
in any State, except by the people
, in their highest sovereign capacity
, when framing or amending their State
: Constitution. In like manner, it car
, only be exercised by the people ol
the Territory represented in a conven.
ton of delegates for the purpose ot
framing constitution, PREDATORY to ad
+ mission as a State into the Union
Then, and not until then, are they in
vested with power to decide the ques
ton whether slavery shall or shall moi
, exist wi thin their limits. This is ar
| act of sovereign authority, and not o.
subordinate territorial legislation
e Were it otherwise, then indeed would
g the equality of the States in the Terri
: tories be destroyed, and the rights o.
, property in slaves would depend, no
: upon the guarantees of the Constitu
: ton, but upon the shifting majorities o
f an irresponsible territorial legislature
e Such doctrine, from its intrinsic un
6 soundness, cannot long influence any
. portion of our people, much less can i
s afford good reason for dissolution
J, of the Union. The most palpable vic
r lations of costitutional duty which have
s yet been committed consist in the act.
: of different State Legislatures to de
f defeat the execution of the Fugitive
: Slave Law. 1t ought to be remem
3 bercd, however; that for these act
G neither Congress nor any Presiden
L. .,c<lv hold rocnoucihla. havinf