A Weekly Paper, Devoted to Literature, Politics, the Arts, Sciences, Agmeulture, &c., &c—Terms: One Dollar and Fifty Cents in Advance. BY DAVID OVER. LIST ML MESSAGE OF JAMES BUCHANAN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. FELLOW-CITIZENS Of THE SENATE AND HODSE OP REPRESENTATIVES Throughout the year since our lart meeting, the country has tieen eminently pros perous JD all its material interests. Tho general health has been excellent, our hai vests have been abundant, and plenty smiles throughout the land. Our commerce and manufactures have been prose cuted with energy and industry, and hive yielded fair and ample returns. In short, no nation in the tide ot time has ever presented a spectacle of greater material prosperity than we have done until within a verv recent period. Why is it. then, that discontent now so exten sively prevails, aod the Uuion of the States, which is tbe source of all these blessings, is threatened with destruction 1 The long continued and intem perate interference ot the Northern people with tbe question of slavery in the Southern States has at length produced its natural effects. The differ ent sectious of the Union are now arrayed against each other, and the time has arrived, so much (headed by the Father of his Country, when hostile geographical parties have been formed. I have long foreseen and often forewarned my countrymen of the now impending dauger. This does not pro- j cee i solely from the elaim on the part of Congress or the territorial legislatures to exclude slavery from the Territories, nor from the efforts of different I States to defeat tbe execution of the Fugitive : Slave law. All or any of those evils might have ; Been endured by the South without danger to the i Union, (as others have been,) in the hope that time j and reflection might apply the remedy. Tbe im-J mediate peril arises not so much from these causes • as irorn the fact that the incessant and violent agi- | tation of the slavery question throughout the North for the last quarter of a century, has at length pro duced its malign influence upou the slaves and in spired them with vague notions of freedom— >iettee a sense of security no longer xiats around the family altar. This feeling of peace at home ims giver, place to apprehensions of servile insur rection. M any a matron throughout the South re tires at night in dread of what may befall herself and her children before the morning. Should this j apprehension of domestic danger, whether real or imaginary, extend and intensity itself until it shall pervade the masses ot the Southern people, then disunion will become inevitable. Self-preserva tion is the firs: liw of nature, and his been im pkilted in the heart of man by his Creator for the wisest purpose; and no political union, however fraught with blessings and benefits in all other re spects, can long contiuue, if tbe necessary conse quence bo to render the homes and firesides of nearly half the parties to it habitually and hope lessly insecure. Sooner or later the bonds of such u Union must be severed. It is my oonvlcWon Oat this fatal period has not yet arrived ; and my prayer . ro God is that He would preserve the Constitution j and the Union throughout all generations. , Bat let us take warning in time, and remove the I cause of danger. It cannot be denied that, for five and twenty years, the agitation at the North against slavery in the South, has been incessant. In 1835 ; tctorial handbills, and inflammatory appeals, were } circulated extensively throughout the South, ola character to excite the passions of the slaves ; and, j 1 the language of General Jackson, "to stimulate them to insurrection, and produce all the horrors of a servile war." This agitation has ever since j teen eontined by the public press, by the proceed ings of State and County conventions, and by j abolition sermons ami lectures. The time ol Con gress has been occupied in violent speeches on this never-ending subject; and aopeals in pamphlet and other forms, endorsed by distinguished names, have been ser.t forth from this central point, and spread broadcast over the Union. i How easy would it he for the American people to settle the slavery question forever, and to restore peace and harmony to this distracted country. They, and they alone, can do it. All that is necessary to accomplish the object, and all for which the slave States have ever contended, is to ' let alone, and permitted to manage tbeir domes tic institutions in their own way. As sovereign States, tliev, and they alone, are responsible be fore God and the world for slavery existing amoDg them. For this, the people of the North are not! more responsible, and have no more right to inter- j ff-re, than with similar institutions in Russia or in Brazil. Upon tbeir good sense and patriotic for- j bearance I confess I still greatly tely. Without; their aid, it is beyond tbe power of any President, no matter what may be his own political proclivi ties, to restore peace and harmony among the Slates. Wisely limited and restrained as is his power, under our Constitution and laws, he alone can accomplish but little, for good ol for evil, on such a momentous question. And luis brings me to observe that the election jf any one of our fellow-citizens to the office of President does not of itself afford just cause for dissolving the Union. This is more especially true if his election bas beeD effected by a mere plurali ty, and not a majority, of tbe people, and has re sulted from transient and temporary causes, which may probably never again occur. In order to justify a reseit to revolutionary resistance, the Federal Government must be guilty of "a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise" of powers not granted by the Constitution. The late presiden tial election, however, has been held in strict con formity with its express provisions. How, then, can the result justify a revolution to destroy tbis very Constitution ? Reason, justice, a regard for the Constitution, all require that w shall wait for some overt and dangerous act on the part of the President el ct before resorting to such a remedy- It is said, however, that ibe antecedents ot tbe President elect bav* tieen sufficient to justify the fears of the Soutn that he will attempt to iuvade their constitutional rights. But are such appre hensions of contingent danger in the future suffi cient to justify the immediate destrutcion of the nolbst system of government ever devised by mortals 1 From the very nature of his office, and Its high responsibilities, he must necessarily be con re.v.;tj?c. The stern duty of administering the vast and complicated concerns ot this Government aff rds in itself a guarantee that he will not at tempt anv violation of a clear constitutional right. Ai.. r ail," he i no more than the chief executive officer of the Government. His proviuce is not to make, but to execute, tiie laws; and it is a re mark: lie fact in our history, that, notwithstanding the repeated efforts ol the anti-slavery party, no single act has ever passed Congress, unless we may possibly ixcept the Missouri Compromise, impair ing Su the slightest degree, the rights of the South to IL L- prop.rty in slaves. And it may also be observed, judging from present indications, that no possibility exists ot the pasrage of such an act, by a majority of both Houses, either in the present or the next Congress. Surely, under these circum s.aran, we ought to be restrained from present ac- ti on by the precept of Ilita who spake as never man s;>ok<\ ■*.! it "sdßciefit unto the day is the evil ticrt-f .*' The day of evil may never come, un ess we shall rashly bring it upon ouraclvea. it is alk fwd as oc<- cause for immediate seces- sion that the Southern States are denied equal rights wit* the other States in the commou Terri- tories. But ! y what authority are these denied I Net by Congress, which has never passed, and I beSieve.uevi r will pass, any act to exclude slavery item these Territories : and cettainly not by the Supremo Court, which baa solemnly decidei that slaves are property, and, like all other property, their owners have a right to take them into the common Territories, and hold them there under the protection of the Constitution. So far, then, as Congress is concerned, the ob jection is not to anything they have already done, but to what they may do hereafter. It will surely be admitted that this apprehension of future dan ger is no good reason for an immediate dissolution of the Union. It is true that the territorial legis lature of Kansas, on the 23d of February, 1860, passed ia great baste an act, over the veto of the governor, declaring that slavery "is and shall be, forever prohibited in this Territory Such an act, however, plainly violating the rights of prop erty secured by the Constitution, wilisurely be de clared void by the judieiary whenever it shail be presented iu a legal form. Only three days after my inauguration the Su- j preuie Court of the United States solemnly adjudged that this power did not exist in a territorial legisla ture. Yet such has been the factious temper of the times that the correctness of this decision has been extensively impugned before the people, and the question has given rise to angry political con flict throughout the country. Those who have ap pealed from this judgment of our highest constitu tional tribunal to popular assemblies would, if they could, iuvest a territorial legislature with power to annul the sacred rights of property. This power Congress is expressly forbidden by the Federal Constitution to exercise. Every State legislature in the Union is forbidden by its own constitution to exercise it. It cannot be exercised in any State except by tue people in their highest sovereign capacity whan framing or amending their State constitution. In like manner, it can only be ex ercised by the people of a Territory represented in a convention of delegates for the purpose of fram ing a constitution preparatory to admission as a State into the Union. Then, and not until then, are they invested with power to decide the question whether slavery shall or shall not exist within their limits. This is an act of a sovereign authority, and not of subordinate territorial legislation.— Were it otherwise, then indeed would the equality ot the States in the Territories be destroyed, and S the rights of property in slaves would depend, not | upon the guarantees of the Constitution, but upon i tbe shifting majorities of an irresponsible territorial I legislature. Such a doctrine, from its intrinsic un j soundness, cannot long influence any considerable portion of onr people, much less can it afford a good reason for a dissolution of the Union. Tbe most palpable violations of constitutional duty which have yet been committed consist in tho acts of different State legislatures to defeat the ex ecution of the fugitive slave law. It ought to be remembered, however, that for these acts, neither Congress nor any President can justly be bell te sponsible. Having been passed in violation of the Federal Constitution, they are therefore null and void. AM ttie courts, both State and National, before who n the question lias arisen, havefrom the begtsulßg d,Urd uae fugitive *Uv& law to be eOst stilutiouai. l'Ue single exception is tnat of a State I court in Wisconsin ; and this lias not only Imen J reversed by the proper appelate tribunal, but bis | met with such universal reprobation that there can j be no danger from it as a precedent. The validity j of this law has been established over and over again by tin; Supreme Court of tbe United States with j perfect unanimity. It is founded upon an express 1 provision of the Constitution, requiring tlwt fngi i live slaves who escape from service in one State to another shall ba "delivered up" to their misters.—* Without this provision it is a well-known historical I fact that tbe Constitution itself coull never hive been adopted by the Convention. In one form or | other under the acts of 1793 and 1850, both being : substantially the same, the fugitive slave law has been the law of the land from the days of Wash- I ington until the present moment. Here, then, a clear case is presented, in which it will be tbe duty of the next President, as it has been my own, to i act with vigor in executing this supreme law against the conflicting enactments of Stale legislatures.— Should he fail in the performance of this high duty, he will then have manifested a disregard of the Constitution and laws, to tbe 1 great injury of the people of nearly one-half the States of tbe Union. But are we to presume in advance that he will thus violate his duty 1 This would be at war with every principle of justice and of Christian charity. Let us w.ut for the overt act. The fugitive-slave law tus been carried into execution in every contested i case since the commencement of the present ad i ministration , though often, it is to be regretted, : with great loss and inconvenience to the master, ' and with considerable expense to the government. i Let us trust that the State legislatutes will repeal their unconstitutional and obnoxious enactments. — j Unless this shall be done without unnecessary dc i lay, it is impossible for any Human power to save I the Union. Tbe Southern States, standing on the basis of tbe Constitution, have a rigbt to demand tbis act of justice troua the States of the North.— Should it be refused then tho Constitution, to which all tbe States are parties, will have been willfully violated by one portion of tbeua in a provisiou essential to the domestic seoarity and happiness of tbe remainder. In that event tbe injured States, after having first used all peace ful and constitutional meaus to obtaio redress, would be justified in revolutionary resistance to the Government of the Union. I have purposely confined my remarks to rev olutionary resistance, because it has been claim ed withiu tbe lust two years that any State, whenever tbis shall be its sovereign will and pleasure, may secede frooi tbe UnioD, in accord ance with tho Constitution, and without auy violation of the constitutional rights of the oth er taeni ae re of the Confederacy. That as each became parties to the Union by tbe vote of its owu people assembled in Convention, so any one of them may retire from the Union in a similar manner by the vote of such a conven tion. lu order to justify secession as a constitu tional remedy, it must be on the principle tbat the Federal (iovernmeot is a mere voluntary as sociation of States, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one ot the contracting parties. If this be so, the Confederacy is a rope of sand, to be penetrated and dissolved by the first adverse wave of public opinion in any of the States.— lu this manner our thirty-three States may re solve themselves into as many petty, jarring, and hostile republics, each one retiriug from the Union, without responsibility, whenever any sudden excitement might impel them to such a course. By this process a Union might be en tirely broken into fragments in a few weeks, which cost our forefathers many years of toil, privation, and blood to establish. Such a principle is wholly inconsistent with the history as well as the character of the Fed eral Constitution. After it was framed, with the greatest deliberation and care, it was sub mitted to conveutioßs of the people of the seve ral States for ratification. Its provisions were discussed at length in these bodies, composed BEDFORD. PA., FRIDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1860. of tbe first men of the country. Its opponents contended that it conferred powers upon the Federal Government dangerous to the rights of the States, whilst its advocates maintained that under a fair construction of the instrument there was no foundation for such apprehensions. In that mighty struggle between the first intel lects of this or any other country, it never oc curred to any individual, either among its op ponents or advocates, to assert, or even to inti mate, that their efforts wore all vain labor, becauso tbe moment that auy State telt. herself aggrieved she might secede from the Union.— What a crushing argument would this have proved against those who dreaded that the rights of the States would be endangered by the Con stitution. The truth is, that it was not until many years after the origin of tbe Federal Gov ernment that such a proposition was first ad vanced. It was then met and refuted by the conclusive arguments of Gen Juokson, who in his message of 16th January, 1833, transmit ting the nullifying ordinanoe of South Carolina to CoDgress, employs the following language: "The right of the people of a single State to absolve themselves at will, and without the con sent of tbe other States, from their most solemn obligations, and hazard the liberty and happi ness of the millions composing this Union, cannot bo acknowledged. Such authority is believed to be utterly repugnant both to the principles upon which the General Government is constituted and to tho objects which it was expressly formed to attain." It is not pretended that any clause in tbe Constitution gives countenance to such a theo ry. It is altogether founded upon inference, not from any language contained in the instru ment itself, but fiom the sovereign character of the several Statos by which it was ratified. But is it boyond the power of a State, Rko an individual, to yield a portion of its sovereign right to secure tbe remainder? In tbe language of Mr. Madison, who has been called the father of the Constitution: "It was formed by the States—that is, by the people in each of the States, acting in theirdiigheat sovereignty ca pacity; and formed consequently by tho same authority which formed tho State constitution." "Nor is the Government of the Uoited States oreated by the Constitution, less a Government in the strict sense of tbe term, within of ire powers, than the gjove-rttMJit ere the constitutions of tiie "States are within their severe! spheres. It is, like thetu, orgauized j into legislative, executive, and judieiary de- > part moots. It operates, like them, directly on | persons and things; and, like them it has at command a physical force lor executing the powers commit'ed to it. It wis intended to be perpetuated, aud not to be annulled at the pleasure of any one of , the contracting parties. The old articles ot ! confederation were entitled "Articles of Con federation aud Perpetual Union between tho State#;" and by the 13th article it is expressly declared that "the articles of this Confedera tion &bali be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union snail bo perpetual." The pre amble to the Constitution of the United States, having express reference to tho articles of Con federation, recites that it was established "in older to form a more perfect Union." And yet it is contended that this "more perfect Union" does not include the essential attribute of perpetuity. But that tbe Union wis designed to be per petual appears conclusively from the nature aDd exteut of the [rowers conferred by the Consti tution on tbe Federal Government. These pow ers embrace tbe very highest attributes of ua tional sovereignty. Tbey place both the sword aud the purse under its control. Congress has power to make war, and t < make peace; to raise and support armies and navies, and to conclude treaties with foreign governments. It is in vested with the power to coin money, and to ; regulate tbe value thereof, and to regulate com | meroe with foreign nations, aDd among the sev ; eral Slates. It is not necessary to enumerate i the other high powers wbieb have been confer : red upon tbe Federal Government. In order |to carry the enumerated powers into effect, | Congress possesses the exclusive right to lay and collect duties on imports, and :u common with the States to lay and collect all other j taxes. Hut the Constitution lias not only conferred these high powers upon Congress, bat it has adopted effectual uieanß to restrain the States from interfering with their exercise. For that purpose it has, in strong prohibitory lauguage, expressly declared tbat "no State shall enter into any treaty, alliance or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bilis ot credit; make anything but gold and silver coiu a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder ex post Jaclo law, or law luipairiug the obligation of contracts." More over, "without the consent of Congress, no Slate shall lay any imposts or duties on any imports or exports, except what may be abso lutely necessary for executing its inspection laws;" and, if they exoeed tbts amount, the excess shall belong to th 9 Unitetf States. And "no State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tooage; keep troops, or ships of w ir, in time of peace; enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power; or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay." in order stili further to secure the uninter rupted exercise of these high powers against Stat# interposition, it is provided "that this Constitution aud the laws of the IJuited States which shall be inado in purscauoe thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, un der 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 aury State to the contrary notwithstanding." The solemn sanction of religion has been su peradded to the obligations of official duty, and alt Senators and Representatives of the United States, ail members of State legislatures sftard all executive and judioial officers, "both of tbe United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution." In order to carry into effect these powers the Constitution has established a perfect Govern ment in all its forms. Legislative, Executive, affff Judicial; and this Government, to the ex tent of its powers, acts directly upon tbe indi vidual citizens of every State, and executes its own decrees by tho agency of its own officers. Iu this respect it differs entirely from the Govs eruraeut under the old Confederation, which was confined to making requisitions ou the States in their sovereign character. This left it in tbe discretion of each whether to obey or to refuse, and they often declined to comply with such requisitions. It thus became neces sary, for tbe purpose of removing this barrier, and "in order to form a more perfect Union," to establish a Government which could act di rectly upon the people, and execute its own laws without tbe intermediate agency of the States. This has been accomplished by the Constitution of the United States. In short, the Government created by ths Con stitution, and deriving its authority from the sovereign people of each of the several States, has precisely tbe same right to exercise its power over tbe people of all these States, in enumerated cases, that each one of them possesses over subjects not delegated to the Wuited States but "reserved to the States, res pectively, or to the people." To the extent of the delegated powers tbe Ceostitution of the United States is as much a part of tbe constitution of each State, and ia as binding upon its people, as though it had Iwen texnally inserted thereu. jfPhis Government, therefore, is a great and pfflNr'ul Government, invested with all tbe at tributes of sovereignty over the special subjects to which its authority extends. Its framers newer intended to implant in its bosom the seeds of Jt own destruction, nor were they at its Ration guilty of the absurdity of providing ar its own dissolution. It was not intended ej its framers to be the baseless fabric of a which, at tbe touch of the enchanter, vanish iuto thin air, but a substantial mighty fabric, capable of resisting the: alow decay of tin and of defying the storm* of ages. iuded, well may the jedous patriots of that day have indulged fears that a government of such high powers might violate tho reserved rights of the States, and wisely did they adopt the rule of a strict construction of these powers to preveuc tbe danger! Rut they did not fear, nor had iboy any reason to imagine, that the Constitution would ever be so interpreted as to enable any State, by her own act, and without the consent of her sister States, to discharge her people from all or any of their Federal ob ligations. It city he asked, then, are the people of the States without redress against tbe tyrany and oppression of the Federal Government ? By no means. The right of resistance on the part of the governed agaiust the oppression of their governments cannot be denied. It exists inde pendently of all constitutions, aud bas beeu exercised at ail periods of the world's history. Under it old governments have been destroyed, and new ones have taken their place. It is embodied in stroug aud express language in our own Declaration of Independence. But tbe distinction must 6ver bo observed, that this is revolution against au established Govern ment, and not a voluntary secession from it by virtue of an inherent oonstitutional right. In short, let us look tbe danger fairly in the face. Secession is neither more nor less than revolution. It may or it may not be justifia ble revolution, but still it is revolution. What, in the meantime, is the responsibility and true position of the Executive? He is bound by a solemn oath before God and the country "to take care that the laws be faith fully executed," and from this obligation be cannot be absolved by any human power. But wuat tf the performance of this duty, in whole or in part, has been rendered impractioabb by events over which he oould have exercised no control? Such, at the present moment, is the ease throughout the State of North Carolina, so far as the laws of the United States to se cure the administration of justice by means of the Federal Judiciary are concerned. All the Federal officers within its limits, thro' whose agency alone these laws can be carried into execution, have already resigned. We have no longer a district judge, a district attorney, or a marshal in South Carolina. In fact, the whole machinery of the Federal Government, ueeessary for the distribution of remedial jus tice among the people, has beeu demolished; and it would be diffioult, if not impossible, to replace it. The only acts of Congress on the statute book, boaring upon this subject, are those of the 28tb February, 1795, and 3d Maroh, 1807. These authorize the President, after he shall have ascertained that the marshal with his posse comitatus is unable to execute civil or orimiual process in any particular case, to call forth the militia and employ the army and navy to aid him in performing this service, having first by proclamation commanded the insur gents "to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes, withio a limited time."— This duty cannot by possibility be performed in a State where no judioial authority exists to issue process, and where, even it there were such an officer, toe entire population would constitute one solid combination to resist him. The bare enumeration of these provisions prove how inadequate they are without further legislation to overcome a united opposition in a single State, not to speak of other States who may place themselves in a similar attitude. Congress alone has power to decide whether the present lain can or oanuot be amooded so as to carry out more effectually tbe objects ef the Constitution. The same iasupersble obstacles do not He ia tbe way of executing the laws for tbe collec tion of the oustoms. The revenue still con tinues to be collected, as heretofore, at the custom house at Charleston; and should tho collector unfortunately resign, a successor may be appointed to perform tbis duty. Then ia regard to tho property of the Uni ted States in South Carolina. This has been purchased for a fair equivalent, "by the con sent of the legislature of the State," "for tho erection of forts, magazines, arsena.s," &c., and over those the authority "to exercise ex clusive legislation," has bocu expressly granted by the Constitution to Congress. It is not believed that any attempt will be made to ex pel the Uoited States from this property by force; but if ia this I shoal! prove to be mis taken, tbe officer in command of tbe forts has received orders to act strictly on tbe defen sive. In snob a contingency, the responsibili ty for consequences would rightfully rest upon tbe heads of the assailants. Apart from tbe execution of the laws, so far as this may be practicable, tbe Executive bas no authority to decide what shall be the rela tions between tbe Federal Government and South Carolina. He has been invested with no such discretion, lie possesses no power to change the relations heretofore existiug tween them, much less to acknowledge the in dependence of that State. Tbis would be to invest a mere Executive offiocr with tbe power of recognizing the dissolution of the Confede racy among our tbirty-three sovereign States. It bears no resemblance to the roeoenition ot a foreign de facto government, involving no such responsibility. Any attempt to do tbis would, on his part, be a naked act of usurpa tion. It is, therefore, my daty to submit to Congress the whole queaviou in all its bear ing*. The course of events is so rapidly has tening forward, that the emergency may soon arise, waen you may be called upon to decide the momentous quest-ion whether you possess the power, by force of arms, to compel a State to remain in tbe Union. I should leel myself recreant to my duty were I not to express an opinion ou this important subject. The question fairly stated is: Has the Con stitution delegated fo Congress the paweif tn coerce a State into submission wnicfi aiteutp-lug to withdraw or has actually withdrawn from ths Confederacy? If answered in the affirma tive, it must be on the principle that the power has been conferred upon Congress to declare and to make war again. l .t a State. After much serious reflection 1 have arrived at tho conclusion that no such power bas been dole gated to Congress or to any other department cf the Federal Government. It is manifest upon an inspection of the Constitution, that this is cot anioug the specific and enumerated powers grauted to Congress; aud it is equally apparent that its exercise is not "necessary and proper for carrying inti execution" auy one of these powers. So far from tbis power haviDg been delegated to Congress, it was ex pressly refused by the Convention which framed ibe Constitution. It appears, from the proceedings of that body, that on the 31st of May, 1787, the clause "authorizing au exertion of the force of the whole against a delinquent State" came up for consideration. Mr. Madison opposed it in a brief but powerful speech, from which I shall extract but a single sentence. He ob served: "The use of force against a State would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment; aud would proba bly be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by whicb it might be bound." Upon bis motion tbe clause was unanimously postponed, and was never again 1 believe pre sented Soou afterwards, on tbe Bth June, 1787, when incidentally adverting to the sub ject, he said: "Any Government for the Uni ted States, formed on the supposed practicabil ity of using force against the unconstitutional prooeodinga of the States, would provo as vis ionary and fallacious as the government of Congress," evidently meaning the then existiug Congress of tiie old Confederation. Without descending to particulars, it may be safely asserted, that tbe power to make war against a State is at variance with tbe whole spirit and intent of the Constitution. Suppose such a war should result ia the conquest of a State, how are we to govern it afterwards? Shall we hold it us a proviuoe, and govern it by despotic power? In the nature of things we couid not, by physical force, control the will of the people and compel them to elect senators aDd representatives to Congress, and to perform all tbe other duties depending upon their own volition, and required from the free citizens of a free State as a constituent mem ber of the Confederacy. But, if possessjd of this power, would it be wise to exerciso it under existing ciroumstanc es? The objeot would doubtless be to preserve tbe Union. War would not only present tbe most effectual meaus of destroying it; but would banish all hope of its peaceable recoa construction. Besides, in the fraternal con flict a vast amount of blood and treasure would be exapendd, roqderiug future reconcil iation betweeu tbe States impossible. In tbe meantime, who can fortell what would be the suffering and privation of the people during its existence? The fact is, that our Union rests upon pub lic opinion, and oan never be cemented by the blood of its citizens shed in civil war. If it cannot live in the affeotions of tbo peopie, it must cue day perish. Congress possesses many means of preserving it by conciliation; but the sword was uot placed iu their hands to pre serve it by force. But i may be permitted solemnly to invoke my countrymen to pause and deliberate, be fore they determine to destroy this, the graud- VOL. 33, NO. 50 est temple which has ever been dedicate J t® human freedom sinee the world began! It h* been consecrated by the blood of oar fathers, by the glories of the past, and by the hopes of the future. Tbo Union has already made o the most prosperous, and, era long, will, if preserved, render us the most powerful oatioo on the face of the earth. In every foreign le gion of the globe the title of Aoaerieen >Sttkr Sen is held fi the highest twfwjf;rrtd 'tiftco pronounced in a foreign inb'i it causes toe hearts of our countrymen to swell with honest pride. Surely when wo reach the brink of the yawning abyss, we shall recoil with horror from the last fatal plunge. By such a dread oatastropbe the hopes of the friends of free dom throughout the world would be destroyed, and a long night of despotism wouid enshroud the nations. Our example for more than eigh ty years would not only be lost, but would be quoted as a conclusive proof that man is uudt for self government. It is not every wrong—nay, it is not every grievous wrong—which can justify a resort to such a fearful alterna-.ive. This ought to be t'ae last desperate remedy of a despairing peo ple, after every other constitutional means of conciliation had been exhausted. We should reflect that under this free government there is an incessant ebb and flow in pobhc opinion. The slavery question, like everything human, will have its day. 1 firmly believe that it has already reached and passed toe culminating point. But if in the midst of the existing ex citement, the Union shall perish, the evil may then bcooine irreparable. Congress can con tribute much to avert it by proposing and re commending to the Legislatures of the several States tbo remedy for existing evils, wbioh the Constitution has itself provided for its own preservation. This has been tried at different critical periods of our history, and always witn eminent success. It is to be found in tbo fifth article providing for its own amendment. — Under this article amendments have been pro posed by two thirds of both Houses of Con- gress and have been "ratified by the Legisla tures of three fourths of the several States," and consequently become parts of the Constitu tion: To this process the country is indebted for the clause prohibiting Cotigrcia from pas sing any law respecting the establishment of religion, or abridging the freedom of speech, o.' um pvisa, cr of the right ef petition.— To this we are also indebted for tbe Bill of Eights which secures the people against any abuse of power by the Federal Government. Such were the apprehensions justly entertaiued by the friends of States rights at that period as to have rendered it extremely doubtful whether tbe Coastitutiou could have long sur vived without these ammdmrnti. Again, the Constitution was amended by the same process after the election of President Jefferson by the House of .Representatives, in February, 18G3~ Tois amendment was ren dered necessary to prevent a reourrsnce of the dangers which had seriously threatened the existence of the Government during the pen dency of that election- The article tor its own amendment was intended to secure tae auiieabie adjustment of conflicting constitution al questions Ukte the present, which might arise between the governments of the States and that of the United States. This appears from contemporaneous history. in this connection, 1 shall merely call at tention to a few sentences in Mr. Madison's justly celebrated report, in 1799, to the legis lature of Virginia, in this bo ably and con clusively defended the resolutions of the pre ceding legislature against the strictures of sev eral other State Legislatures. These were mainly founded upon the protest of the Vir ginia legislature against the ' Alien and Sedi tion Acts," as "palpable and alarming infrac tions of the Constitution." la pointing out the peaceful aud constitutional remedies, and ne reterred to none other, to which the States were authorized to resort, ou such occasions, he concludes by saying, "that the legislatures of tue States might have made a direct repre sentation to Congress with a view to obtain the rescinding of the two offensive acts, or tbey might have represented to their respective Senator :u Congress their wish that two-thirds thereof would propose an explanatory amend ment to the Constitution, or two-thirds of themselves, if such bad beea their option, migat, by an application to CoDgre9 a, have obtained a convention for the same object."* Tuie is me very course which 1 earnestly re commeud in order to obtain an "explanatory amendment" of the Constitution on the sub ject of slavery. This might originate with Con gress or tiie State Legislatures, as tnty be deemed most advisable to attain the object. The explanatory amendment might be con fined to the final settlement of the true con struction of the Constitution or three special points : 1. Aa express reoegnition of the right of propertj iu slaves in the States where it now exists or may hereafter exist. 2. the duty of proteoung this right io all the cuuiuiou territories throughout their ter ritorial existence, and until they shall be ad mitted as States into the Union, with or with out slavery, as their constitutions may pre scribe. 3. A like recognition ef the right of the master to have his slave, who has escaped from oue State to restored and "delivered up" to him, and of the validity of the fugitive slave law enacted for this purpose, together with a declaration that ail State laws impairing or defeating this right are violations rf the Constitution, and are consequently null and VOld. It may be objected that this oenstruotion of the Constitution has already been settled by the Supreme Court of the United States, and what more ought to be required. The answer is, that a very large proportion ef the people of the United States still contest the correctness
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers