FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   >>  
firms, because of the provision of the Federal constitution (5th amendment) that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," cannot legalize slavery in a territory, where as the Republican platform of 1856 asserts, Congress has "sovereign power," how can a State legislature, in the face of the same constitutional prohibition or principle, (as old as _magna charta_) legalize slavery in any State where such legislature has equally sovereign power? It may be answered to this question, that the Supreme Court of the United States have decided that the amendment to the constitution containing the clause above quoted, does not apply to the State governments; but this answer does not cover the whole ground, for we may ask again: how can Congress, if it has no power to legalize slavery in a territory, constitutionally admit to the Union a new State formed from such Territory with a constitution legalizing slavery? Suppose, for example, such a constitution provides. "The right of the people to hold slaves is hereby declared, and such right shall never be defeated or impaired." The State constitution has no vitality, as such, until the State is admitted to the Union--the act of admission makes the constitution a law, and a law for slavery. Congress therefore in accepting such a constitution from a new State, where slavery had not before existed, as effectually legislates slavery into such State as if a special Congressional act were passed for that purpose. Consistency then, with the Chicago platform would seem to require, that Congress should refuse, for want of constitutional power, to admit any State with a slavery constitution. I here incidentally ask another question: if the constitution, as is asserted, gives Congress _sovereign power_ over the territories, where is the obligation on Congress ever to permit a territory to rise above its territorial condition, and become a State, except on such terms as Congress may impose? What is constitutionally to prevent Congress from erecting and continuing territorial governments until the territories _under the sovereign power of Congress_, outnumber and overshadow the States, and the national government becomes an Imperial power, like the Roman or British Empires, with hundreds of tributary States or provinces? I ask again: If the normal condition of all the territories of the United States is that of freedom, and if Congress cannot legal
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   >>  



Top keywords:
Congress
 
constitution
 
slavery
 
States
 

sovereign

 

territory

 

territories

 

legalize

 

question

 

governments


constitutionally

 

United

 

condition

 

territorial

 

legislature

 

amendment

 

platform

 
constitutional
 
refuse
 

Congressional


special

 

legislates

 
passed
 

require

 

purpose

 

Chicago

 
existed
 

Consistency

 

incidentally

 
effectually

Imperial

 
overshadow
 

national

 

government

 
British
 

normal

 

provinces

 

tributary

 

Empires

 

hundreds


outnumber

 
permit
 
obligation
 

freedom

 

prevent

 

erecting

 

continuing

 

impose

 

asserted

 
formed