Year: 1860

-
dispute between you and US. You will rule
or ruin in all events. This, plair ~ stated,
Is your language TO ms. Perhaps you will
say the Supreme Court has decided the dis
puted Constitutional question in your favor.
Not quite, 50. But, waving the lawyers
distinction. between dictum and decision.
the court have decided the question for you


in sort of way. The Court have substan-
tally said, it is your Constitutional right to
take slaves into the Federal Territories and
to hold them there as property. When
say the decision was made in a sort of way
| mean it was made in divided Court by a
bare majority of the Judges, and they not
quite agreeing with one another in the rea-
sons for making it. that it is so made as that
its avowed supporters disagree with one an
other about its meaning, and that st was
mainly based upon a mistaken statement of
lact--the statement in the opinion that ''the
right Of property in slave is distinctly and
expressly affirmed in the Constitution" An
inspection of the Constitution will show that
the right Of property in slave is not dis
tinctly ard expressly affirmed in it. Bear
in mind the Judges do not pledge their Judi
ialopinion that such right is impledly affirm
ed in the Constitution; but they pledge
their veracity that it is distinctly andexpress-
" aft med there distinctly, that is, not min
gled with anything else-''expressly"-t that
is, in words meaning just that, without the
aid of any inference, and susceptible of no
other meaning. If they had only pledged
their judicial opinion that such right is con-
firmed in the instrument by implication, it
would be open to others to show that neither
the word ''slave" nor slavery" is to be found
in the Constitution, nor the word property
even, in any connection with language allu-
ding to the things slave OF slavery, and that
wherever in that instrument the slave is al
luded to, he is called 'person !" and where
ever his masters legal right in relation to
him is alluded to, it is snoken of as "Service
oflabor due" as debt payable in service
or labor. Also, it would be open to show,
by contemporaneous history, that this mode
of alluding to slaves, instead of speaking of
them, was employed on purpose to exclude
from the Constitution the idea that there
could be property in man. To show all this,
is easy and certain. When this obvious
mistake Of the Judges shall be brought to
their notice. is it not reasonable to expect
that they will Withdraw the mistaken state
ment, ard, reconsider the conclusion based
upon it? And then it is to be remembered
that "ouT fathers. who framed the Govern
ment under which we live'-the men who
made the Constitution--decided this same
constitutional question in our favor long
ago-decided without division among them
selves when making the decision; without
division among themselves about the mean
ing of it after it was made, and so far as any
evidence is left without aasing it upon any
mistake in statement of facts. Under all
these circumstances, do you really feel your
selves justified to break up this Government.
unless such court decision as yours is shall
at once be submitted to as conclusive and
final rule Of political action? But you will
not abide the election of a Republican Presi.
dent. In that supposed event, you say, you
will destroy the Union; and then, you say,
the great crime of having destroyed it will
be upon US! That is COOL A highwayman
holds pistol to my ear, and mutters through
his teeth, "stand and deliver, or shall kill
you, and then you will be a murderer" To
be sure, what the robber demanded of me
my money was my own ; and had a clear
right to keep it; but it was no more my own
than my vote Is my own; and the threat of
death to me, to extort my money, and the
threat of destruction to the Union, to extort
my vote, can scarcely be distinguished in
principle.


FEW WORDS TO REPUBLICANS.


\ few words to Republicans. 1t is ex-
ceedingly desirable that all parts of this great
Confederacy shall be at peace, and in harmo-
ny, one with another. Let us Republicans
do our part to have it So Even though
much provoked, let us do nothing through
passion and i'll temper. Even though the
Southern people will not so much as listen to
us, let US calmly consider their demands,
and yield to them if in our deliberate view
of our duty, we possibly can. Judging by
all they say and do, and by the subject and
nature of their controversy with us, let us
determine, if we can, what will satisfy them?
VIII they be satisfied if the Territories be
Internationally surrendered to them? We
know they will not. In all their present
complaints against US, the Territories are
scarcely mentioned. Inyasions and insur-
rections are the rage now VIII it satisfy
them if, in the future, we have nothing to do
with iavaSions and instructions. We know
ii will not. We so know because we know
we never had anything to do with invasions
and instructions and yet this total abstain
ing docs not exempt us from the cha re and
the denunciation. The question recurs, what
will satisfy them? Simply this: Wemust
not only let them alone, but must, somehow,
convince them that we do let them alone
This we know by experience, is no easy
task We have been so irving to convince
them, from the very beginning of our organ
lzation, but with no success. liz all our plat
forms and speeches we have constantly pro-
tested our purpose to let them alone: but
this has had no tendency to convince them.
Ahkeunayailing to convince them is the fact
that thcy have never detected man of us
in any attempt to disturb them. These nat
ural. and apparently adequate means all
falling. what will convince them9 This. and
this only cease to call slavery acronq and Join
them in calling it right. And this must be
be done thoroughly-done n acts as well as
in 1ccr}s Silence viii not be tolerated-we
must place ourselves avowedlv with them.