amended Constitution, and at this day remains a portion opportunity of annulling the acts of the colonial legisla of the fundamental law of Virginia-proclaiming to the tures by the "inhuman use of the royal negative." world and to posterity that one of the reasons for separating from Great Britain was "the inhuman use of the royal negative in refusing us (the Colony of Virginia), permission to exclude Slavery from us by law !" Thus the policy of the Colonies on the Slavery question had assumed a direct antagonism to that of the British Government; and this antagonism not only added to the importance of the principle of local self-government in the Colonies, but produced a general concurrence of opinion and action in respect to the question of Slavery in the proceedings of the Continental Congress, which assembled at Philadelphia for the first time on the 5th of September, 1774. The legislation of Virginia on this subject may be taken as a fair sample of the legislative enactments of each of the thirteen Colonies, showing conclusively that slavery was regarded by them all as a domestic question to be regarded and determined by each colony to suit itself, without the intervention of the British Parliament or "the inhuman use of the royal negative." Each colony passed a series of enactments, beginning at an early period of its history and running down to the commencement of the Revolution, either protecting, regulating, or restraining African Slavery within its respective limits, and in accordance with their wishes and supposed interests. North and South Carolina, following the example of Virginia, at first encouraged the introduction of slaves, until the number increased beyond their wants and necessities, when they attempted to check and restrain the further growth of the institution, by imposing a high rate of taxation upon all slaves which should be brought into those colonies; and finally, in 1764, Southpliance with their just and reasonable demands. These Carolina passed a law imposing a penalty of one hundred pounds (or five hundred dollars) for every negro slave subsequently introduced into that colony. The colony of Georgia was originally founded on strict anti-slavery principles, and rigidly maintained this policy for a series of years, until the inhabitants became convinced by experience that, with their climate and productions, slave labor, if not essential to their existence, would prove beneficial and useful to their material interests. Maryland and Delaware protected and regulated African Slavery as one of their domestic institutions. Pennsylvania, under the advice of William Penn, substituted fourteen years' service and perpetual adscript to the soil for hereditary Slavery, and attempted to legislate, not for the total abolition of Slavery, but for the sanctity of marriage among slaves, and for their personal security. New-Jersey, New-York, and Connecticut recognized African Slavery as a domestic institution lawfully existing within their respective limits, and passed the requisite laws for its control and regulation. Rhode Island provided by law that no slave should serve more than ten years, at the end of which time he was to be set free; and if the master should refuse to let him go free, or sold him elsewhere for a longer period of service, he was subject to a penalty of forty pounds, which was supposed at that period to be nearly double the value of the slave. Massachusetts imposed heavy taxes upon all slaves brought into the colony, and provided in some instances for sending the slaves back to their native land; and finally prohibited the introduction of any more slaves into the colony under any circumstances. When New-Hampshire passed laws which were designed to prevent the introduction of any more slaves, the British Cabinet issued the following order to Governor Wentworth: "You are not to give your assent to, or pass any law imposing duties upon negroes imported into New-Hampshire." While the legislation of the several colonies exhibits dissimilarity of views, founded on a diversity of interests, on the merits and policy of Slavery, it shows conclusively that they all regarded it as a domestic question affecting their internal polity in respect to which they were entitled to a full and exclusive power of legislation in the several provincial legislatures. For a few years immediately preceding the American Revolution, the African slave-trade was encouraged and stimulated by the British Government, and carried on with more vigor by the English merchants, than at any other period in the history of the Colonies; and this fact, taken in connection with the extraordinary claim asserted in the memorable preamble to the act repealing the stamp duties, that "Parliament possessed the right to bind the Colonies in all cases whatever," not only in respect to all matters affecting the general welfare of the empire, but also in regard to the domestic relations and internal polity of the Colonies-produced a powerful impression upon the minds of the colonists, and imparted peculiar prominence to the principle involved in the controversy. Hence the enactments by the several colonial legislatures calculated and designed to restrain and prevent the increase of slaves; and, on the other hand, the orders issued by the Crown, instructing the colonial governors not to sign or permit any legislative enactment prejudicial or injurious to the African slave-trade, unless such enactment should contain a clause suspending its operation until the royal pleasure should be made known in the premises; or, in other words, until the king should have an On the 14th of October the Congress adopted a Bill of Rights for the Colonies, in the form of a series of resolu tions, in which, after conceding to the British Government the power to regulate commerce and do such other things as affected the general welfare of the empire, without interfering with the internal polity of the Colonies, they declared "That they are entitled to a free and exclusive power in their several provincial legislatures, where their right of representation can alone be preserved in all cases of taxation and internal polity." Having thus defined the principle for which they were contending, the Congress proceeded to adopt the following "Peaceful Measures," which they still hoped would be sufficient to induce com"Peaceful Measures" consisted of addresses to the king, to the Parliament, and to the people of Great Britain, together with an association of non-intercourse to be ob served and maintained so long as their grievances should remain unredressed. The second article of this association, which was adopted without opposition, and signed by the delegates from all the Colonies, was in these words: "That we will neither import nor purchase any slave im ported after the first day of December next; after which time we will wholly discontinue the slave-trade, and will neither be concerned in it ourselves, nor will we hire our vessels, nor sell our commodities or manufactures to those who are engaged in it " This Bill of Rights, together with these articles of association, were subsequently submitted to and adopted by each of the thirteen Colonies in their respective pro vincial Legislatures. Thus was distinctly formed between the Colonies and the parent country that issue upon which the Declaration of Independence was founded, and the battles of the Revolution were fought. It involved the specific claim on the part of the Colonies-denied by the King and Parliament-to the exclusive right of legislation touching all local and internal concerns, Slavery included. This being the principle involved in the contest, a majority of the Colonists refused to permit their delegates to sign the Declaration of Independence except upon the distinct condition and express reservation to each colony of the exclusive right to manage and control its local concerns and police regulations without the intervention of any general Congress which might be established for the United Colonies. Let us cite one of these reservations as a specimen of all, showing conclusively that they were fighting for the inalienable right of local self-government, with the clear understanding that when they had succeeded in throw ing off the despotism of the British Parliament, no Congressional despotism was to be substituted for it: "We, the Delegates of Maryland, in Convention assembled, do declare that the King of Great Britain has violated his compact with this people, and that they owe no allegiance to him. We have therefore thought it just and necessary to empower our Deputies in Congress to join with a majority of the United Colonies in declaring them free and independent States, in framing such further confederation between them, in making foreign alliances, and in adopting such other mea sures as shall be judged necessary for the preservation of their liberties: internal polity and government of this Colony be reserved to "Provided, The sole and exclusive right of regulating the the people thereof. "We have also thought proper to call a new Convention for the purpose of establishing a government in this Colony. "No ambitious views, no desire of independence, induced the people of Maryland to form a union with the other Colo nies. To procure an exemption from Parliamentary taxation, and to continue to the legislatures of these Colonies the sole and exclusive right of regulating their Internal Polity, was our original and only motive. To maintain, inviolate our liberties, and to transmit them unimpaired to posterity, was our duty and first wish; our next, to continue connected with and dependent on Great Britain. For the truth of these assertions we appeal to that Almighty Being who is emphati cally styled the Searcher of hearts, and from whose omniscience none is concealed. Relying on this Divine protection and assistance, and trusting to the justice of our cause, we exhort and conjure every virtuous citizen to join cordially in defense of our common righ's and in maintenance of the free. dom of this and her sister colonies." The first plan of Federal Government adopted for the United States was formed during the Revolution, and is usually known as "The Articles of Confederation." By these Articles it was provided that "Each State retains its Sovereignty, Freedom, and Independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled." At the time the Articles of Confederation were adopted-July 9, 1778-the United States held no lands or territory in common. The entire country-including all the waste and unappropriated lands-embraced within or pertaining to the Confederacy, belonged to and was the property of the several States within whose limits the same was situated. recom Second.-"That the settlers within the Territory so to be purchased and offered for sale shall, either on their owe petition or on the order of Congress, receive authority from of full age to meet together for the purpose of establishing a them, with appointments of time and place, for their free males temporary government to adopt a Constitution and laws of any one of these States (the original States), so that such laws nevertheless shall be subject to alteration by their ordinary Legislature; and to erect, subject to like alteration, counties or ownships for the election of members for their Legisla ture." Having thus provided a mode by which the first inhabltants or settlers of the territory may assemble together and choose for themselves the Constitution and laws of On the 6th day of September, 1780, Congress " some one of the original thirteen States, and declare the mended to the several States in the Union having claims to same in force for the government of their territory tem. waste and unappropriated lands in the Western country, porarily, with the right on the part of the people to a liberal cession to the United States of a portion of their change the same, through their local Legislature, as they respective claims for the common benefit of the Union." may see proper, the Plan then proceeds to point out the On the 20th day of October, 1783, the Legislature of mode in which they may establish for themselves" a perVirginia passed an act authorizing the Delegates in Con-manent Constitution and government whenever they gress from that State to convey to the United States shall have twenty thousand inhabitants, as follows: "the territory or tract of country within the limits of the Virginia Charter, lying and bearing to the northwest of the river Ohio "-which grant was to be made upon the "condition that the territory so ceded shall be laid out and formed into States;" and that "the States so formed shall be distinct republican States, and admitted members of the Federal Union, having the same rights of Sovereignty, Freedom, and Independence as the other States." On the 1st day of March, 1784, Thomas Jefferson and his colleagues in Congress executed the deed of cession in pursuance of the act of the Virginia Legislature, which was accepted and ordered to "be recorded and enrolled among the acts of the United States in Congress assembled." This was the first territory ever acquired, held, or owned, by the United States. On the same day of the deed of cession, Mr. Jefferson, as chairman of a committee which had been appointed, consisting of Mr. Jefferson of Virginia, Mr. Chase of Maryland, and Mr. Howell of Rhode Island, submitted to Congress 66 a plan for the temporary government of the territory ceded or to be ceded by the individual States to the United States." It is important that this Jeffersonian plan of government for the Territories should be carefully considered for many obvious reasons. It was the first plan of government for the Territories ever adopted in the United States. It was drawn by the author of the Declaration of Independence, and revised and adopted by those who shaped the issues which produced the Revolution, and formed the foundations upon which our whole American system of government rests. It was not intended to be either local or temporary in its character, but was designed to apply to all "territory ceded or to be ceded," and to be universal in its application and eternal in its duration, wherever and whenever we might have territory requiring a government. It ignored the right of Congress to legislate for the people of the Territories, without their consent, and recognized the inalienable right of the people of the Territories, when organized into political communities, to govern themselves in respect to their local concerns and internal polity. It was adopted by the Congress of the Confederation on the 23d day of April, 1784, and stood upon the Statute Book as a general and permanent plan for the government of all territory which we then owned or should subsequently acquire, with a provision declaring it to be a Charter of Compact," and that its provisions should "stand as fundamental conditions between the thirteen original States and those newly described, unalterable but by the joint consent of the United States in Congress assembled, and of the particular State within which such alteration is proposed to be made." Thus this Jeffersonian plan for the government of the Territories-this "Charter of Compact" "these fundamental conditions," which were declared to be "unalterable" without the consent of the people of "the particular State [territory] within which such alteration is proposed to be made," stood on the Statute Book when the Convention assembled at Philadelphia in 1787, and proceeded to form the Constitution of the United States. Now let us examine the main provisions of the Jefferson Plan: First. That the territory ceded or to be ceded by the individual States to the United States, whenever the same shall have been purchased of the Indian inhabitants and offered for sale by the United States, shall be formed into additional States," etc., etc. The Plan proceeds to designate the boundaries and territorial extent of the proposed "additional States," and then provides: Third." That such temporary government only shall continue in force in any State until it shall have acquired twenty Congress, they shall receive from them authority, with apthousand free inhabitants, when, giving due proof thereof to pointments of time and place, to call a Convention of Repre sentatives to establish a permanent Constitution and government for themselves." 66 Having thus provided for the first settlers " a temporary government" in these "additional States," and for a permanent Constitution and government" when they shall have acquired twenty thousand inhabitants, the Plan contemplates that they shall continue to govern themselves as States, having, as provided in the Virginia deed of session, "the same rights of sovereignty, freedom, and independence," in respect to their domestic affairs and internal polity, "as the other States," until they shall have a population equal to the least numerous of the original thirteen States; and in the meantime shall keep a sitting member in Congress, with a right of debating but not of voting, when they shall be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the other States, as follows: Fourth.-" That whenever any of the said States shall have of free inhabitants as many as shall then be in any one of the least numerous of the thir een original States, such State shall be admitted by its delegates into the Congress of the United States on an equal footing with the said original States." And of the said States, after the establishment of their temporary "Until such admission by their delegates into Congress any government, shall have authority to keep a sitting member in Congress, with the right of debating, but not of voting." Attached to the provision which appears in this paper under the "third" head is a proviso, containing five propositions, which, when agreed to and accepted by the people of said additional States, were "to be formed into a charter of compact," and to remain forever "unal terable," except by the consent of such States as well as of the United States-to wit: "Provided, That both the temporary and permanent gov. ernments be established on these principles as their basis:" 1st.-"That they shall forever remain a part of the United States of America." 2d.-"That in their persons, property, and Territory they shall be subject to the government of the United States in Congress assembled, and to the Articles of Confederation in all those cases in which the original States shall be so subject." 3d.-"That they shall be subject to pay a part of the federal debts contracted, or to be contracted-to be apportioned on measure by which apportionments thereof shall be made on them by Congress according to the same common rule and the other States." 4th. That their respective government shall be in repub lican form, and shall admit no person to be a citizen who holds any hereditary title." The fifth article, which relates to the prohibition of Slavery, after the year 1800, having been rejected by Congress, never became a part of the Jeffersonian Plan of Government for the Territories, as adopted April 28, 1784. which emphatically ignores the right of Congress to bind The concluding paragraph of this Plan of Government, the people of the Territories without their consent, and recognizes the people therein as the true source of all legitimate power in respect to their internal polity, is in these words: "That all the preceding articles shall be formed into a charter of compact, shall be duly executed by the President of the United States, in Congress assembled, under his hand and the seal of the United States, shall be promulgated, and shall stand as fundamental conditions between the thirteen original States sent of the United States in Congress assembled, and of the and those newly described, unalterable but by the joint conparticular State within which such alteration is proposed te be made." Having thus divided the powers of government into the three appropriate departments, with which they had always been familiar, they proceeded to confer upon the Federal Government substantially the same powers which they as colonies had been willing to concede to the British Government; and to reserve to the States and to the people the same rights and privileges which they as colonies had denied to the British Government during the entire struggle which terminated in our Independence, and which they had claimed for themselves and their posterity as the birthright of all freemen, inalienable when organized into political communities, and to be enjoyed and exercised by colonies, territories, and provinces as fully and completely as by sovereign States. Thus it will be seen that there is no organic feature or fundamental principle embodied in the Constitution of the United States which had not been familiar to the people of the Colonies from the period of their earliest settlement, and which had not been repeatedly asserted by them when denied by Great Britain during the whole period of their colonial history. Let us pause at this point for a moment, and inquire whether it be just to those illustrious patriots and sages who formed the Constitution of the United States, to assume that they intended to confer upon Congress that unlimited and arbitrary power over the people of the American Territories, which they had resisted with their blood when claimed by the British Parliament over British colonies in America? Did they confer upon Congress the right to bind the people of the American Territories in all cases whatsoever, after having fought the battles of the Revolution against a "Preamble" declaring the right of Parliament "to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever?" If, as they contended before the Revolution, it was the birthright of all Englishmen, inalienable when formed into political communities, to exercise exclusive power of legislation in their local legislatures in respect to all things affecting their internal polity-Slavery not excepted-did not the same right, after the Revolution, and by virtue of it, become the birthright of all Americans, in like manner inalienable when organized into political communities-no matter by what name, whether Colonies, Territories, Provinces, or new States? This Jeffersonian Plan of Government embodies and | interpreted and expounded by the Colonies during their carries out the ideas and principles of the fathers of the controversy with Great Britain, for their model-making Revolution-that the people of every separate political such modifications in its structure and principles as the community (dependent Colonies, Provinces, and Territo- change in our condition had rendered necessary. They ries as well as sovereign States) have an inalienable right entrusted the Executive functions to a President in the to govern themselves in respect to their internal polity, place of a King; the Legislative functions to a Congress, and repudiates the dogma of the British Ministry and composed of a Senate and House of Representatives, in the Tories of that day, that all Colonies, Provinces and lieu of the Parliament consisting of the Houses of Lords and Territo nes were the property of the empire, acquired Commons; and the Judicial functions to a Supreme Court with the common blood and common treasure, and that and such inferior courts as Congress should from time to the inhabitants thereof have no rights, privileges, or time ordain and establish. immunities except such as the Imperial Government should graciously condescend to bestow upon them. This Plan recognizes by law and irrevocable "compact" the existence of two distinct classes of States under our American system of government-the one being members of the Union, and consisting of the original thirteen and such other States, having the requisite population, as Congress should admit into the Federal Union, with an equal vote in the management of Federal affairs as well as the exclusive power in regard to their internal polity respectively-the other, not having the requisite population for admission into the Union, could have no vote or agency in the control of the Federal relations, but possessed the same exclusive power over their domestic affairs and internal policy respectively as the original States, with the right, while they have less than twenty thousand inhabitants, to choose for their government the Constitution and laws of any one of the original States; and when they should have more than twenty thousand, but less than the number required to entitle them to admission into the Union, they were authorized to form for themselves "a permanent Constitution and government;" and in either case they were entitled to keep a delegate in Congress with the right of debating, but not of voting. This "Charter of Compact," with its "fundamental conditions," which were declared to be "unalterable" without "the joint consent" of the people interested in them, as well as of the United States, thus stood on the statute book unrepealed and unrepealable- furnishing a complete system of government for all "the territory ceded or to be ceded" to the United States, without any other legislation upon the subject, when, on the 14th day of May, 1787, the Federal Convention assembled in Philadelphia and proceeded to form the Constitution under which we now live. Thus it will be seen that the dividing line between Federal and Local authority, in respect to the rights of those political communities which, for the sake of convenience and in contradistinction to the States represented in Congress, we now call Territories, but which were then known as "States," or "new States," was so distinctly marked at that day that no intelligent man could fail to perceive it. It is true that the government of the Confederation had proved totally inadequate to the fulfillment of the ends for which it was devised; not because of the relations between the Territories, or new States, and the United States, but in consequence of having no power to enforce its decrees on the Federal questions which were clearly within the scope of its expressly delegated powers. The radical defects in the Articles of Confederation were found to consist in the fact that it was a mere league between sovereign States, and not a Federal Government with its appropriate departments-Executive, Legislative, and Judicial-each clothed with authority to perform and carry into effect its own peculiar functions. The Confederation naving no power to enforce compliance with the resolves, "the consequence was, that though in theory its resolutions of Congress were equivalent to laws, yet in practice they were found to be mere recommendations, which the States, like other sovereignties, observed or disregarded, according to their own good-will and gracious pleasure." Congress could not impose duties, collect taxes, raise armies, or do any other act essential to the existence of government, without the voluntary consent and coöperation of each of the States. Congress could resolve, but could not carry its resolutions into effect-could recommend to the States to provide a revenue for the necessities of the Federal Government, but could not use the means necessary to the collection of the revenue when the States failed to comply-could recommend to the States to provide an army for the general defense, and apportion among the States their respective quotas, but could not enlist the men and order them into the Federal service. For these reasons a Federal Government, with its appropriate departments, acting directly upon the individual citizens, with authority to enforce its decrees to the extent of its delegated powers, and not dependent upon the voluntary action of the several States in their corporate capacity, became indispensable as a substitute for the government of the Confederation. In the formation of the Constitution of the United States the Federal Convention took the British Constitution, as Names often deceive persons in respect to the nature and substance of things. A single instance of this kind is to be found in that clause of the Constitution which says: Congress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." This being the only clause of the Constitution in which the word Territory" appears, that fact alone has doubtless led many persons to suppose that the right of Congress to establish temporary governments for the Territories, in the sense in which the word is now used, must be derived from it, overlooking the important and controlling facts that at the time the Constitution was formed the word "Territory" had never been used or understood to designate a political community or government of any kind in any law, compact, deed of cession, or public document; but had invariably been used either in its geographical sense to describe the superficial area of a State or district of country, as in the Virginia deed of cession of the "Territory or tract of country" northwest of the river Ohio; or as meaning land in its character as property, in which latter sense it appears in the clause of the Constitution referred to, when providing for the disposition of the "Territory or other property belong. ing to the United States." These facts, taken in connection with the kindred one that during the whole period of the Confederation and the formation of the Constitution the temporary governments which we now call "Territories," were invariably referred to in the deeds of cession, laws, compacts, plans of government, resolutions of Congress, public records, and authentic documents as "States,' or new States," conclusively show that the words "Territory and other property" in the Constitution were used to designate the unappropriated lands and other property which the United States owned, and not the people who might become residents on those lands, and be organized into political communities after the United States had parted with their title. It is from this clause of the Constitution alone that Congress derives the power to provide for the surveys and sale of the public lands and all other Iroperty belonging to the United States, not only in the Territories, but also in the several States of the Union. But for this provision Congress would have no power to authorize the sale of the public lands, military sites, old ships, cannon, muskets, or other property, real or personal, which belong to the United States, and are no longer needed for any public purpose. It refers exclusively to property in contradistinction to persons and communities. It confers the same power "to make all needful rules and regulations" in the States as in the Territories, and extends wherever there may be any land or other property belonging to the United States to be regulated or disposed of; but does not authorize Congress to control or interfere with the domestic institutions and internal polity of the people (either in the States or the Territories) who may reside upon lands which the United States once owned. Such a power, had it been vested in Congress, would annihilate the sovereignty and freedom of the States as well as the great principle of self-government in the Territories, wherever the United States happen to own a portion of the public lands within their respective limits, as, at present, in the States of Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, California, and Oregon, and in the Territories of Washington, Nebraska, Kansas, Utah, and New-Mexico. The idea is repugnant to the spirit and genius of our complex system of Government; because it effectually blots out the dividing line between Federal and Local authority which forms an essential barrier for the defense of the independence of the States and the liberties of the people against Federal invasion. With one anomalous exception, all the powers conferred on Congress are Federal, and not Municipal, in their character-affecting the general welfare of the whole country without interfering with the internal polity of the people-and can be carried into effect by laws which apply alike to States and Territories. The exception, being in derogation of one of the fundamental principles of our political system (because it authorizes the Federal Government to control the municipal affairs and internal polity of the people in certain specified, limited localities), was not left to vague inference or loose construction, nor expressed in dubious or equivocal language; but is found plainly written in that Section of the Constitution which says: "Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding en miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards and other needful buildings." No such power "to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever," nor indeed any legislation in any case whatsoever, is conferred on Congress in respect to the municipal affairs and internal polity, either of the States or of the Territories. On the contrary, after the Constitution had been finally adopted, with its Federal powers delegated, enumerated, and defined, in order to guard in all future time against any possible infringement of the reserved rights of the States, or of the people, an amendment was incorporated into the Constitution which marks the dividing line between Federal and Local authority so directly and indelibly that no lapse of time, no partisan prejudice, no sectional aggrandizement, no frenzied fanaticism can efface it. The amendment is in these words: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This view of the subject is confirmed, if indeed any corroborative evidence is required, by reference to the proceedings and debates of the Federal Convention, as reported by Mr. Madison. On the 18th of August, after a series of resolutions had been adopted as the basis of the proposed Constitution and referred to the Committee of Detail for the purpose of being put in proper form, the record says: "Mr. Madison submitted, in order to be referred to the Committee of Detail, the following powers, as proper to be added to those of the general Legislature (Congress): "To dispose of the unappropriated lands of the United States. "To institute temporary governments for the new States arising therein. "To regulate affairs with the Indians, as well within as without the limits of the United States. "To exercise exclusively legislative authority at the seat of the General Government, and over a district around the same not exceeding square miles, the consent of the legislature of the State or States comprising the same being first obtained." Here we find the original and rough draft of these seve ral powers as they now exist, in their revised form, in the Constitution. The provision empowering Congress "t dispose of the unappropriated lands of the United States" was modified and enlarged, so as to include "other pro perty belonging to the United States," and to authorize Congress to "make all needful rules and regulations" for the preservation, management, and sale of the same. The provision empowering Congress "to institute temporary governments for the new States arising in the unappropriated lands of the United States," taken in connection with the one empowering Congress "to exercise exclusively Legislative authority at the seat of the Gene ral Government, and over a district of country around the same," clearly shows the difference in the extent and nature of the powers intended to be conferred in the new States or Territories on the one hand, and in the District of Columbia on the other. In the one case it was pro posed to authorize Congress "to institute temporary governments for the new States," or Territories, as they are now called, just as our Revolutionary fathers recognized the right of the British crown to institute local govern. ments for the Colonies, by issuing charters under which the people of the Colonies were "entitled (according to the Bill of Rights adopted by the Continental Congress) to a free and exclusive power of legislation, in their several Provincial Legislatures, where their right of representation can alone be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal polity;" while, in the other case, it was proposed to authorize Congress to exercise, exclusively, legislative authority over the municipal and internal polity of the people residing within the district which should be ceded for that purpose as the seat of the General Government. Each of these provisions was modified and perfected by the Committee of Detail and Revision, as will appear by comparing them with the corresponding clauses as finally incorporated into the Constitution. The provision to authorize Congress to institute temporary governments for the new States or Territories, and to provide for their admission into the Union, appears in the Constitution in this form: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union." The power to admit "new States," and "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper" to that end, may fairly be construed to include the right to institute temporary governments for such new States or Territories, the same as Great Britain could rightfully institute similar governments for the Colonies; but certainly not to authorize Congress to legislate in respect to their municipa. affairs and internal concerns, without violating that great, fundamental principle in defense of which the battles of the Revolution were fought. If judicial authority were deemed necessary to give force to principles so eminently just in themselves, and which form the basis of our entire political system, such authority may be found in the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, in the Dred Scott case. that case the Court say: In "This brings us to examine by what provision of the Constitution the present Federal Governinent, under its delegated and restricted powers, is authorized to acquire territory outit may exercise therein over the person or property of a citiside of the original hmits of the United States, and what powers zen of the United States, while it remains a territory, and until it shall be admitted as one of the States of the Union. "There is certainly no power given by the Constitution to the Federal Government to establish or maintain colonies, bordering on the United States or at a distance, to be ruled torial limits in any way except by the admission of new and governed at its own pleasure; nor to enlarge its terri States. . "The power to expand the territory of the United States by the admission of new States is plainly given; and in the construction of this power by all the departments of the Govern ment, it has been held to authorize the acquisition of territory, not fit for admission at the time, but to be admitted as soon as its population and situation would entitle it to admission. It is acquired to become a State, and not to be held as a colony and governed by Congress with absolute authority; and as the propriety of admitting a new State is committed to the sound discretion of Congress, the power to acquire territory for that purpose, to be held by the United States until it is in a suitable condition to become a State upon an equal footing with the other States, must rest upon the same discretion." Having determined the question that the power to ac quire territory for the purpose of enlarging our territorial limits and increasing the number of States, is included within the power to admit new States and conferred by the same clause of the Constitution, the Court proceed to say that "the power to acquire necessarily carries with it the power to preserve and apply to the purposes for which it was acquired." And again, referring to a former deci sion of the same court in respect to the power of Congress to institute governments for the Territories, the Court say: "The power stands firmly on the latter alternative put by the Court-that is, as the 'Inevitable consequence of the right to acquire territory.'" The power to acquire territory, as well as the right, in the language of Mr. Madison, "to institute temporary governments for the new States arising therein" (or Territorial governments, as they are now called), having been traced to that provision of the Constitution which provides for the admission of "new States," the Court proceed to consider the nature and extent of the power of Congress over the people of the Territories: "All we mean to say on this point is, that, as there is no express regulation in the Constitution defining the power which the General Government may exercise over the person or property of a citizen in a territory thus acquired, the Court must necessarily look to the provisions and principles of the Constitution, and its distribution of powers, or the rules and principles by which its decision must be governed. "Taking this rule to guide us, it may be safely assumed that citizens of the United States, who emigrate to a territory belonging to the people of the United States, cannot be ruled as mere colonists, dependent upon the will of the General Government, and to be governed by any laws it may think proper to impose. The Territory being a part of the United States, the Government and the citizen both enter it under the authority of the Constitution, with their respective rights defined and marked out; and the Federal Government can exercise no power over his person or property beyond what that instrument confers, nor lawfully deny any right which it has reserved." Hence, inasmuch as the Constitution has conferred on the Federal Government no right to interfere with the property, domestic relations, police regulations, or internal polity of the people of the Territories, it necessarily follows, under the authority of the Court, that Congress can rightfully exercise no such power over the people of the Territories. For this reason alone, the Supreme Court were authorized and compelled to pronounce the eighth section of the Act approved March 6, 1820 (commonly called the Missouri Compramise), inoperative and void there being no power delegated to Congress in the Constitution authorizing Congress to prohibit Slavery in the Ter ritories. In the course of the discussion of this question the Court gave an elaborate exposition of the structure, principles, and powers of the Federal Government; showing that it possesses no powers except those which are delegated, enumerated, and defined in the Constitution; and that all other powers are either prohibited altogether or are reserved to the States, or to the people. In order to show that the prohibited, as well as the delegated powers are enumerated and defined in the Constitution, the Court enumerated certain powers which cannot be exercised either by Congress or by the Territorial Legislatures, or by any other authority whatever, for the simple reason that they are forbidden by the Constitution. Some persons who have not examined critically the opinion of the Court in this respect have been induced to believe that the slavery question was included in this class of prohibited powers, and that the Court had decided in the Dred Scott case that the Territorial Legislature could not legislate in respect to slave property the same as all other property in the Territories. A few extracts from the opinion of the Court will correct this error, and show clearly the class of powers to which the Court referred, as being forbidden alike to the Federal Government, to the States, and to the Territories. The Court say: "A reference to a few of the provisions of the Constitution will illustrate this proposition. For example, no cne, we pre | footing with citizens of the States, and guards them as firmly and plainly against any inroads which the General Government might attempt under the plea of implied or incidental powers. And if Congress itself cannot do this-if it is beyond the powers conferred on the Federal Government-it will be ad mitted, we presume, that it could not authorize a Territorial government to exercise them. It could confer no power on any local government, established by its authority, to violate the provisions of the Constitution." Nothing can be more certain than that the Court were here speaking only of forbidden powers, which were denied alike to Congress, to the State Legislatures, and to the Territorial Legislatures, and that the prohibition extends "everywhere within the dominion of the United States," applicable equally to States and Territories, as well as to the United States. If this sweeping prohibition-this just but inexorable restriction upon the powers of Government- Federal, State, and Territorial-shall ever be held to include the Slavery question, thus negativing the right of the people of the States and Territories, as well as the Federal Government, to control it by law (and it will be observed that in the opinion of the Court "the citizens of a Territory, so far as these rights are concerned, are on the same footing with the citizens of the States.") then, indeed, will the doctrine become firmly established that the principles of law applicable to African Slavery are uniform throughout the dominion of the United States, and that there is an repressible conflict that the United States must and will, sooner or later, between opposing and enduring forces, which means become either entirely a slaveholding nation or enti. ely a free labor nation,' Notwithstanding the disastrous consequences which would inevitably result from the authoritative recognition and practical operation of such a doctrine, there are those who maintain that the Court refe red to and included the Slavery question within that class of forbidden powers which (although the same in the Territories as in the States) could not be exercised by the people of the Territories. If this proposition were true, which fortunately for the peace and welfare of the whole country it is not, the conclusion would inevitably result, which they logically deduce from the premises-that the Constitution by the recognition of Slavery establishes it in the Territories beyond the power of the people to control it by law, and guarantees to every citizen the right to go there and be protected in the enjoyment of his slave property; and when all other remedies fail for the protection of such rights of property, it becomes the imperative duty of Congress (to the performance of which every member is bound by his conscience and his oath, and from which no consideration of political policy or expediency can release him) to provide by law such adequate and complete protection as is essential to the enjoyment of an important right secured by the Constitution. If the proposition be true, that the Constitution establishes Slavery in the Territories beyond the power of the people legally to control it, another result no less startling, and from which there is no escape, must inevitably follow. The Constitution is uniform "everywhere within the dominions of the United States"-is the same in Pennsylvania as in Kansas-and if it be true, as stated by the President in a special message to Congress, "that Slavery exists in Kansas by virtue of the Constitution of the United States," and that "Kansas is therefore at this moment as much a Slave State as Georgia or South Carolina," why does it not exist in Pennsylvania by virtue of the same Constitution? sume, will contend that Congress can make any law in a Ter-therefore has a right to regulate the Slavery question If it be said that Pennsylvania is a sovereign State, and ritory respecting the establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the within her own limits to suit herself, it must be borne in the press, or the right of the people of the territory peaceably mind that the sovereignty of Pennsylvania, like that of to assemble, and to petition the Government for the redress of every other State, is limited by the Constitution, which provides that: grievances. "Nor can Congress deny to the people the right to keep and bear arms, nor the right to trial by jury, nor compel any one to be a witness against himself in a criminal proceeding. So too, it will hardly be contended that Congress could by law quarter a soldier in a house in a territory without the consent of the owner in a time of peace; nor in time of war but in a manner prescribed by law. Nor could they by law forfeit the property of a citizen in a territory who was convicted of treason, for a longer period than the life of the person convicted, nor take private property for public use without just compen sation." "The powers over persons and property, of which we speak, are not only not granted to Congress, but are in express terms denied, and they are forbidden to exercise them. And this prohibtion is not confined to the States, but the words are general, and extend to the whole territory over which the Constitution gives it power to legislate, including those portions of it remaining under Territorial governments, as well as that covered by States. "It is a total absence of power, everywhere within the dominion of the United States, and places the citizens of a Territory, so far as these rights are concerned, on the same "This Constitution, and all laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." Hence, the State of Pennsylvania, with her Constitution and laws, and domestic institutions, and internal policy, is subordinate to the Constitution of the United States, in the same manner and to the same extent as the Territory of Kansas. The Kansas-Nebraska Act says that the Territory of Kansas shall exercise legislative power over "all rightful subjects of legislation consistent with the Constitution," and that the people of said Territory shall be left "perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States." The provisions of this act are believed to be in entire harmony with the Constitution, and |