FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   511   512   513   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526   527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535  
536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   >>   >|  
could not have accepted the cession with such a condition. To have signed away a part of its constitutional grant of power would have been a _breach_ of the Constitution. Further, the Congress which accepted the cession was competent to pass a resolution pledging itself not to _use all_ the power over the District committed to it by the Constitution. But here its power ended. Its resolution would only bind _itself_. Could it bind the _next_ Congress by its authority? Could the members of one Congress say to the members of another, because we do not choose to exercise all the authority vested in us by the Constitution, therefore you _shall_ not? This would have been a prohibition to do what the Constitution gives power to do. Each successive Congress would still have gone to the Constitution for its power, brushing away in its course the cobwebs stretched across its path by the officiousness of an impertinent predecessor. Again, the legislatures of Virginia and Maryland, had no power to bind Congress, either by an express or an implied pledge, never to abolish slavery in the District. Those legislatures had no power to bind _themselves_ never to abolish slavery within their own territories--the ceded parts included. Where then would they get power to bind _another_ not to do what they had no power to bind themselves not to do? If a legislature could not in this respect control the successive legislatures of its own State, could it control the successive Congresses of the United States? But perhaps we shall be told, that the "implied faith" in the acts of cession of Maryland and Virginia was _not_ that Congress should _never_ abolish slavery in the District, but that it should not do it until _they_ had done it within their bounds! Verily this "faith" comes little short of the faith of miracles! "A good rule that works both ways." First, Maryland and Virginia have "good faith" that Congress will _not_ abolish until _they_ do; and then just as "good faith" that Congress _will_ abolish _when_ they do! Excellently accommodated! Did those States suppose that Congress would legislate over the national domain, the common jurisdiction of _all_, for Maryland and Virginia alone? And who, did they suppose, would be judges in the matter?--themselves merely? or the whole Union? This "good faith implied in the cession" is no longer of doubtful interpretation. The principle at the bottom of it, when fairly stated, is this:--That th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   511   512   513   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526   527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535  
536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Congress
 

abolish

 

Constitution

 

Virginia

 

Maryland

 

cession

 
slavery
 

District

 

implied

 

successive


legislatures

 

suppose

 

States

 

accepted

 

control

 

resolution

 

members

 

authority

 

Further

 
pledging

bounds
 
miracles
 
Excellently
 

Verily

 

interpretation

 
doubtful
 

longer

 
principle
 

stated

 
fairly

bottom

 
matter
 
national
 

domain

 
legislate
 
competent
 

committed

 
common
 

jurisdiction

 

judges


accommodated

 
Congresses
 

officiousness

 

stretched

 

cobwebs

 

impertinent

 
signed
 
predecessor
 

brushing

 
vested