within the cognizance of the Federal Judiciary. To compel obedience to these laws, the Courts have authority to punish all who obstruct their regular administration, and the marshals and their deputies have the same powers as sheriffs and their deputies in the several States in executing the laws of the States. These are the ordinary means provided for the execution of the laws, and the whole spirit of our system is opposed to the employment of any other except in cases of extreme necessity, arising out of great and unusual combinations against them. Their agency must continue to be used until their incapacity to cope with the power opposed to them shall be plainly demonstrated. It is only upon clear evidence to that effect that a military force can be called into the field. Even then its operations must be purely defensive. It can suppress only such combinations as are found directly opposing the laws and obstracting the execution thereof. It can do no more than what might and ought to be done by a civil posse, if a civil posse could be raised large enough to meet the same opposition. On such occasions especially the military power must be kept in strict subordination to the civil authority, since it is only in aid of the latter that the former can act at all. But what if the feeling in any State against the United States should become so universal that the Federal officers themselves (including judges, district-attorneys, and marshals) would be reached by the same influences, and resign their places? Of course the first step would be to appoint others in their stead, if others could be got to serve. But, in such an event, it is more than probable that great difficulty would be found in filling the offices. We can easily conceive how it might become altogether impossible. We are therefore obliged to consider what can be done in case we have no courts to issue judicial process, and no ministerial officers to execute it. In that event troops would certainly be out of place, and their use wholly illegal. If they are sent to aid the courts and marshals, there must be courts and marshals to be aided. Without the exercise of those functions, which belong exclusively to the civil service, the laws cannot be executed in any event, no matter what may be the physical strength which the Government has at its command. Under such circumstances, to send a military force into any State with orders to act against the people would be simply making war upon them.

The existing laws put and keep the Federal Government strictly on the defensive. You can use force only to repel an assault on the public property, and aid the courts in the performance of their duty. If the means given you to colfect the revenue and execute the other laws be insufficient for that purpose, Congress may extend and make them

more effectual to that end.

If one of the States should declare her independence, your action cannot depend upon the rightfulness of the cause upon which such declaration is based. Whether the retirement of a State from the Union be the exercise of a right reserved in the Constitution or a revolutionary movement, it is certain that you have not in either case the authority to recognize her independence or to absolve her from her Federal obligations. Congress or the other States in convention assembled must take such measures as may be necessary and proper. In such an event I see no course for you but to go straight onward in the path you have hitherto trodden, that is, execute the laws to the extent of the defensive means placed in your hands, and act generally upon the assumption that the present constitutional relations between the States and the Federal Government con

tinue to exist until a new order of things shall be established, either by law or force.

Whether Congress has the constitutional right to make war against one or more States, and require the Executive of the Federal Government to carry it on by means of force to be drawn from the other States, is a question for Congress itself to consider. It must be admitted that no

such power is expressly given; nor are there any words in the Constitution which imply it. Among the powers enumerated in article I. section 8, is that "to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and to make rules concerning captures on land and water." This certainly means nothing more than the power to commence and carry on hostilities against the foreign enemies of the nation. Another clause in the same section gives Congress the power" to provide for calling forth the militia," and to use them within the limits of the State. But this power is 80 restricted by the words which immediately follow, that it can be exercised only for one of the following purposes: 1. To execute the laws of the Union; that is, to aid the Federal officers in the performance of their regular duties. 2. To suppress insurrections against the States; but this is confined by article IV. section 4, to eases in which the State herself shall apply for assistance against her own people. 3. To repel the invasion of a State by enemies who come from abroad to assail her in her own territory. All these

provisions are made to protect the States, not to authorize an attack by one part of the country upon another; to preserve their peace, and not to plunge them into civil war.

Our forefathers do not seem to have thought that war was calculated to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." There was undoubtedly a strong and universal conviction among the men who framed and ratified the Constitution, that military force would not only be useless, but pernicious as a means of holding the States together.

If it be true that war cannot be declared, nor a system of general hostilities carried on by the central government against a State, then it seems to follow that an attempt to do so would be ipso facto an expulsion of such State from the Union. Being treated as an alien and an enemy, she would be compelled to act accordingly. And if Congress shall break up the present Union by unconstitutionally putting strife and enmity, and armed hostility, between different sections of the country, instead of the "domestic tranquillity" which the Constitution was meant to insure, will not all the States be absolved from their Federal obli gations? Is any portion of the people bound to contribute their money or their blood to carry on a contest like that? The right of the General Government to preserve itself in its whole constitutional vigor by repelling a direct and positive aggression upon its property or its officers, cannot be denied. But this is a totally different thing from an offensive war to punish the people for the political misdeeds of their State governments, or to prevent a threatened violation of the Constitution, or to enforce an acknowledgment that the government of the United States is supreme. The States are colleagues of one another, and if some of them shall conquer the rest and hold them as subjugated provinces, it would totally destroy the whole theory upon which they are now connected.

If this view of the subject be as correct as I think it is, then the Union must utterly perish at the moment when Congress shall arm one part of the people against another for any purpose beyond that of merely protecting the General Government in the exercise of its proper constitutional functions. I am, very respectfully, yours, etc., J. S. BLACK.

To the President of the United States.

Committee of Thirty-three. December 4th. In the House of Repre sentatives, Mr. BOTELER of Virginia' moved that so much of the President's message as relates to the present perilous condition of the country be referred to a special committee of one from each State, which was agreed to-yeas 145, nays 38, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Adams of Massachusetts, Adams of Ky., Adrain, Aldrich, Allen, Alley, Anderson of Ky., Anderson, of Missouri, Avery, Babbitt, Barr, Barret, Bocock, Boteler, Bouligny, Branch, Brayton, Briggs, Br.stow, Brown, Burch, Burnett, Campbell, Carter, Cark of N. Y., Clark of Mo., Cobb, John Cochrane of N. York, Colfax, of Ind., Davis, of Miss., De Jarnette, Delano, Dueli, Dunn, Conkling. Corwin, Covodo, Cox, Curtis, Davis of Md., Davis Edmundson, Eliot, Ely, English, Etheridge, Ferry, Florence, Foster, Fouke, Frank, French, Gilmer, Gooch, Graham, Gurley, Hale, Hall, Hardeman, Harris of Md., Harris of Va., Haskin, Hatton, Helmick, Hill, Hoard, Holman, Houston, Howard of Ohio, Hughes, Humphrey, Jenkins, Junkin, Kellogg of Illinois, Kenyon, Kilgore, Killinger, Kunkel, Lurrabee, Leach of N. Carolina, Leake, Logan, Longnecker, Love, Maclay, Martin of Ohio, Martin, of Va., Maynard, McClernard, Mc Kenty, McPherson, Millson, Moore of Ky., Moorhead, Morrill, Morris of Penn., Morris of Ill.,Nelson, Niblack, Nixon, Noell, Palmer, Pendleton, Pettit, Peyton, Phelps, Porter, Pryor, Quarles, Reynolds, Rice, Riggs, Robinson of R. I., Robinson of Illinois, Royce, Rust, Sickles, Smith of Va., Smith of N. C., Somes, Spaulding, Spinner, Stevenson, Stewart of Md., Stewart of Pa., Stokes, Stout, Stratton, Thayer, Theaker, Thomas, Train, Trimble, Vallandigham, Vance, Vandever, Verree, Walton, Washburn of Me, Webster, Whiteley, Windom, Winslow, Wood, Woodruff-145.

NAYS-Messrs. Ashley, Beale, Bingham, Blair, Blake, Buffinton, Burlingame, Burnham, Carey, Case, Edgerton, Fenton, Grow, Hickman, Howard of Mich., Hutchins, Irvine, Kellogg of Mich., Leach of Mich., Lee, Loomis, Love joy, McKean, McKnight, Morse, Perry, Potter, Pottle, Sedgwick, Sherman, Stanton, Stevens, Tappan, Tompkins, Wade, Washburn of Wis., Washburne of Ill., Wells—38.

During the vote, Mr. SINGLETON of Mississippi, said he declined to vote because he had not been sent here to make any com

promise or patch up existing difficulties, and that a Convention of the people of Mississippi would consider and decide the subject.

Mr. HAWKINS of Florida, said the day of compromise had passed, and that he was opposed, and he believed his State was opposed, to all and every compromise.

Mr. CLOPTON of Alabama, believed in the right of a State to secede, considered that the only remedy for present evils, and would | not hold out any delusive hope, or sanction any temporizing policy.

Mr. MILES of South Carolina, said their delegation had not voted on the question because they conceived they had no interest in it. They considered their State as already withdrawn from the Confederacy in every thing except form.

Mr. PUGn of Alabama, said that State intended following South Carolina out of the Union by the 10th of January next, and he paid no attention to any action taken in this body. The Committee consisted of

Mr. Corwin of Ohio.
Mr. Millson of Virginia.

Mr. Adams of Massachusetts.
Mr. Winslow of North Carolina.
Mr. Humphrey of New York.
Mr. Boyce of South Carolina.
Mr. Campbell of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Love of Georgia.
Mr. Ferry of Connecticut.
Mr. Davis of Maryland.
Mr. Robinson of Rhode Island.
Mr. Whiteley of Delaware.
Mr. Tappan of New Hampshire.
Mr. Stratton of New Jersey.
Mr. Bristow of Kentucky.
Mr. Morrill of Vermont.
Mr. Nelson of Tennessee.
Mr. Dunn of Indiana.
Mr. Taylor of Louisiana.

Mr. Reuben Davis of Mississippi.
Mr. Kellogg of Illinois.
Mr. Houston of Alabama.

Mr. Morse of Maine.
Mr. Phelps of Missouri.
Mr. Rust of Arkansas.
Mr. Howard of Michigan.
Mr. Hawkins of Florida.
Mr. Hamilton of Texas.
Mr. Washburn of Wisconsin.
Mr. Curtis of Iowa.
Mr. Burch of California.
Mr. Windom of Minnesota.
Mr. Stout of Oregon.

Messrs. Hawkins and Boyce asked to be excused from service on the Committee, but the House refused.

that the people should be true to their constitutional obligations; that as our differences had arisen mainly from the acquisition of new territory, no more territory ought ever to be acquired; affirming the right of self-government in the Territories as independent of Congress or the President; in favor of admission of new States with a population equal to the ratio of representation; that the Government of the United States should never own any more territory, and that annexation of territory in the future should only be by consent of the States; that there should be no Congressional legislation whatever on the subject of slavery. and that every Congressional District should in future be an Electoral District, entitled every four years to elect one Presidential elector.

By Mr. JOHN COCHRANE of New York. A preamble and resolution to the effect that the decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case should be received as a settlement of the questions therein discussed and decided; also, in favor of amending the Constitution so as to give a right to Congress to establish territorial governments; providing for admission of new States with a population equal to the Federal ratio of representation, with or without slavery, and prohibiting Congress and the people of the territory from impairing the right of property in slaves during its existence as a territory.

Mr. JOHN COCHRANE of New York, also offered amendments to the Constitution in favor of a division of territory on the line of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes; in favor of admission of new States with or without slavery; to prohibit Congress from abolishing the inter-State slave-trade; reaffirming the obligation of the fugitive slave law; guaranteeing a right of transit in free States of persons with slaves, and declaring void all nullifying acts of State or Territorial Legislatures.

Mr. JOHN COCHRANE of New York, also offered a preamble and resolutions to the saine effect, as regards the question of slavery in the territories, with his proposition Ito amend the Constitution, just cited, and coupled with a resolution declaring that the Constitution of the United States existed only by agreement of sovereign States, and that any attempt of the Federal Government to coerce a sovereign State into the observance of the Constitutional compact, would be to levy war upon a substantial power and precipitate a dissolution of the Union.

Mr. HASKIN offered as a substitute to the above, a resolution directing the Committee on the Judiciary to inquire and report as to what action Congress should take in regard to enforcing the Constitution and laws in South Carolina, and what was the duty of the Executive in this regard.

By Mr. MALLORY of Kentucky. Instruct

with or without slavery, as its Constitution should provide; in favor of the repeal of all enactments of State Legislatures which conflicted with acts, of Congress, or the Constitution, affirming the constitutionality of the fugitive slave law; inculcating a kind and fraternal spirit among the people of the different States, and deprecating any interference with the domestic institutions of one another, and declaring that the Constitution could only be preserved by the same spirit of compromise that had governed its formation.

By Mr. MORRIS of Pennsylvania. Instructing the Committee of Thirty-three to report if there are any personal liberty bills of any State in conflict with the fugitive slave law, and to inquire and report if the fugitive slave law is not susceptible of amendment so as to prevent kidnapping, and render more certain the ascertainment of the true character of the fugitive.

By Mr. STEWART of Maryland. A lengthy preamble reciting to the effect that the States were sovereign, independent political organizations originally, and had united from time to time under such form of association or union as was deemed expedient-which form of association had been from time to time changed peaceably as circumstances required; that it was the deliberate opinion of many of the people that our present form of government, from causes either resulting from or in violation of the Constitution, was inadequate for the purposes for which it was created; that certain States were threatening to withdraw their allegiance; and that we had reached a crisis in our history which required an alteration of the present form of government; and he followed with a resolution instructing the committee on the President's message to inquire if any measures could be adopted for preserving the rights of all the States under the Union, and if not, to then inquire as to the best mode of adjusting the rights of the several States in a dissolution of the Union.

By Mr. LEAKE of Virginia. A resolution in favor of the amendment of the Constitution in the following particulars: Making it the duty of Congress to pass laws to protect slavery where it exists; taking away all territorial jurisdiction over the matter; guaranteeing the right of transit for persons with their slaves in any State; reaffirming the fugitive slave clause, with additional provision for compensation in case of failure to return the fugitive.

By Mr. JENKINS of Virginia. A resolution directing the Committee of Thirty-three to inquire into the best mode of amending the fugitive slave law so as to adequately punish its infraction and render compensation when the slave should not be restored; also as to whether the election of a President hostile to the slaveholding interest was not a sufficient reason to justify the slaveholding States to require that their concurrent sanction should be

separately given to every act of the Federa! Government, or whether there should be a dual Executive or a dual Senate, or the assent of a majority of the Senators from each section necessary to pass any law, or what other measures were needed for the protection of the slaveholding States.

By Mr. Cox of Ohio. A resolution directing the Committee of Thirty-three to inquire what additional legislation was necessary to enforce the provisions of the Constitution relative to rendition of fugitives, and that such inquiry should be made with special reference to punishing all judges, attorney-generals, executives, and other State officers who should oppose its execution.

By Mr. HUTCHINS of Ohio. A resolution directing said committee to inquire what legislation was needed to give effect to section two of article four of the Constitution, granting to "the citizens of each State all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States," and to secure to all the people the full benefit of article four of amendments to the Constitution, which guarantees exemption from unreasonable searches and seizures, etc.

By Mr. SHERMAN of Ohio. A series of resolutions to the effect that the only remedy for existing dissensions was to be found in a faithful observance of all the compromises of the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof; instructing the Committee of Thirty-three to inquire whether any State or the people thereof have failed of their duty in this regard, and if so what remedy should be made therefor, and directing said committee to divide the remaining Territories into States of convenient size with a view to their immediate admission into the Union.

By Mr. BINGHAM of Ohio. A resolution directing the committee to report such additional legislation as might be needed to put down armed rebellion and protect the property of the United States from seizure, and the citizens thereof from unlawful violence. OTHER PROPOSITIONS SUBMITTED TO THE HOUSE.

Mr. ETHERIDGE of Tennessee proposed a series of amendments to the Constitution, in substance as follows:

That Congress shall not interfere with slavery in the States, nor in any forts, arsenals, etc., ceded to the United States by a slave State, nor in the District of Columbia, without the consent of Maryland, Virginia, and the inhabitants of the District, nor without making compensation; nor with the inter-State slave-trade. Foreign slavetrade prohibited. In regard to slavery in Territories, a provision similar to that proposed by Mr. Cochrane, before cited. No foreign territory to be acquired except on a concurrent two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a treaty ratified by two-thirds of the members of the Senate; and an amendment in reference to rendition of fugitives from justice.

Mr. DAVIS of Indiana. A preamble and resolution reciting the Ordinance of Secession of South Carolina, and directing the Committee on the Judiciary to inquire and report what legislation had been rendered necessary in consequence thereof.

Mr. HOLMAN of Indiana, offered a series of resolutions, denying the right of secession, affirming it to be the duty of the General Government to collect the revenue and protect the public property, and instructing the Committee on the Judiciary to inquire and report what legislation is needed to enable the Government to discharge its constitutional duty in these regards.

Mr. FLORENCE of Pennsylvania, offered as a substitute for the report of the Committee of Thirty-three a series of amendments. to the Constitution, in substance as follows:

1st. Granting the right to hold slaves in all territory south of 36° 30', and prohibiting Congress and the Territorial Legislature from interfering with it therein, or in any other place within the jurisdiction of the United States, without the consent of all the slave States.

2d. Admitting States into the Union with a population equal to the ratio of representation, with or without slavery, as their Constitution shall prescribe.

3d. Prohibiting any alteration of the present basis of representation-declaring the slavery question to be one exclusively for each State; but with proviso that this amendment shall not be construed so as to release the General Government from its obligations to suppress domestic insurrection in any State.

4th. Giving the right to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia exclusively to the State of Maryland.

5th. Prohibiting any State from passing laws to obstruct the rendition of fugitive slaves.

6th. Granting the right of transit with slaves through all the States.

7th. Declaring all slaves brought into any State by permission thereof, and escaping, to be fugitives from labor.

15th. No State shall retire from the Unior without the consent of three-fourths of all the States.

16th. Giving full power to three-fourths of the States at any time to call a Convention to amend or abolish the Constitution.

17th. Declares articles 8, 9 and 10 of these amendments to be unalterable, unless by consent of all the slave States.

Mr. FENTON of New York, offered as a substitute for the report of the Committee of Thirty-three a preamble and resolution, reciting the conflicting differences of opinion as to the causes of the present disturbances, and favoring the calling of a Convention of delegates from the several States.

Mr. KELLOGG of Illinois. As a substitute for the report of the Committee, amendments to the Constitution in substance as follows: Prohibiting slavery in territory north of 36° 30', and permitting it south of that line, and providing for its admission as States with a population equal to the ratio of representation, with or without slavery, as its Constitution should prescribe; prohibiting any interference by Congress with the subject in the States, either to abolish or establish slavery; affirmatory of the fugitive slave-clause of the Constitution, with amendment providing for compensation, and prohibiting the foreign slave-trade.

By Mr. VALLANDIGHAM of Ohio, the following preamble and resolution: JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE CON

STITUTION.

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States is a

grant of specific powers delegated to the Federal Govern

ment by the people of the several States, all powers not delegated to it nor prohibited to the States being reserved

to the States respectively, or to the people: and whereas it powers and jurisdiction at the expense of weaker Governis the tendency of stronger Governments to enlarge their ments, and of majorities to usurp and abuse power and oppress minorities, to arrest and hold in check which tendency compacts and Constitutions are made; and whereas the only effectual constitutional security for the rights of minorities, whether as people or as States, is the power expressly reserved in Constitutions of protecting those protection, by checks and guarantees, is recognized in the Federal Constitution, as well in the case of the equality of

rights by their own action; and whereas this mode of

the States in representation and in suffrage in the Senate, as in the provision for overruling the vote of the President,

and for amending the Constitution, not to enumerate other examples; and whereas, unhappily, because of the vast

extent and diversified interests and institutions of the sev

9th. Making all acts of any inhabitants of the United States tending to incite slaves to insurrection, penal offences.

10th. Making the county in which any fugitive slave shall be rescued, liable to pay

the value thereof.

be suppressed; and whereas it concerns the peace and sta bility of the Federal Union and Government that a division

of the States into mere slaveholding and non-slaveholding sections, causing hitherto, and from the nature and neces sity of the case, inflammatory and disastrous controversies upon the subject of slavery, ending already in present disruption of the Union, should be forever hereafter ignored: the recognition of other sections without regard to slavery and whereas this important end is best to be attained by

neither of which sections shall alone be strong enough to

oppress or control the others, and each be vested with the

power to protect itself from aggressions: Therefore,

Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assemfollowing articles be and are hereby proposed as amendbled, (two-thirds of both Houses concurring,) That the

ments to the Constitution of the United States, which

shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of said Constitution when ratified by Conventions in three-fourths of the several States:

ARTICLE XIII. SEC. 1. The United States are divided into four sections, as follows:

The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New