V - 1 • ^' ^t." < <> ♦: V> * • • » • ■v' '^ "^ ':.% /.:i-^->o y*/^^.V ,/.:^^'>o M .0 ,« .*,e^-. •^*„ .^ /^V^.. *^^^^« ..^fe-., \^/ :^A \ '-yw.' **'■** 'v^^/ ^^'^^ °-^P-* **"■% '•■ ^' °o /\.ja^%v .c^v^^^o^^ ..^''\-4^^\. « .0' '-^^.-^ ^^ >..^^ :Mai^\ -o^^^^'' : ■bv" •:♦ J' A°^ ^•> /.-^-X /^'j^'y--. z^^^^.x. ^ ?:>• ,^°-'*-.- '• V ^*^ .♦ ./\'^i.\ i..\. /..i:^-*°o ..**\.<^^'V /..i:;^>o ^vO<=.^ *^\ %.** "i* -^^ ^<^ ^_ - . lO. • • ' aO' NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC VOLUNTEERS. Document No. 2. Read this, then hand it to tyc^ti^r Neighbor ! „rit ,^.. :ir ^'T^TTT'^ A- "voLXJisn^ftEn. [^From advance sheets of the OctoberMumber of the Natio.nci,l Democi'atic QU^rterhj He/view.] CHAPTER I. OF THE TKINCIPLES UPOX WHICH ALL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD BE ORGANIZED. The Democratic party having asserted that the people of the several States of the Confederacy have the right to emigrate into any of the ter- ritories of the United States, and to take with them their personal property of whatever kind, whether they emigrate from a slaveholding or a non- slaveholding state, entails upon us, as one of them, the duty of sustaining that assertion by arguments bearing upon the case, and by the statement of facts connected with our government ; the principles under which it was organized, and by which all its powers are regulated. All governments are, or should be established solely for the benefit of the people to be governed ; and whenever any conflict of interest arises among such people, it is the duty of the government to endeavor to evolve the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This being admitted to be the true object of government, the principle which establishes the ruling powers of the majority is easily comprehended. But, as majorities are sometimes as tyrannical as individuals, human wisdom has adopted certain forms by which tlie powers of the majoi-it}'- may be restricted within certain defined limits. By the establishment of this form of government the people are enabled to sustain their ceded legal rights, and protect their common interests from violation, whether from the majority, or from those whom the majority may have placed in power. This restriction upon their independent action can be made only by the adoption of a constitution, in which the powers and rights of bolh people and government shall be clearly defined. When this fundamental form 1 T3Z 2 — has been established, it becomes a binding compact between the people themselves, and also between the people and their chosen rulers. Such a solemn agreement should receive the greatest respect, and the unyielding sup])ort of all good citizens. The organic act, or constitution, constitutes the basis upon which all the acts of the government are founded, and by which the people connected with such government are induced to respect and sustain such acts. Many of the people may not always and at all times approve of some of those acts, because their judgments or prejudices may be in opposition ; but as they have been enacted by that branch of government which was estab- lished by the constitution, they adopt the necessity of compliance until they are repealed or modified in a legal and constitutional manner. A government organized upon such a basis is supposed to be free from the charge of tyranny, and the people are looked upon as being no other than freemen. The constitution being a compact, made by and between the people, possesses therefore a mutual character, whicli is thus placed beyond the control of the mere prejudices or even the interests of any part of the people, when the enforcement of such prejudices or interests Avould be calculated to subvert the interests- of the other part ; and although a majority may uphold such encroachments upon the rights of the minority, yet, if the constitution does not sustain such majority, but, on the contrary, condemns its acts, the majority is bound to conform to the requirements of the constitution as soon as those requirements are interpreted by the authority which the same constitution has designated as the umpire and expounder of its provisions, between the government and people, and between the different portions of the people. The constitution having been created, and the several departments of the government for which it provides, having been established by the inde- pendent action of the people, it becomes the bounden duty of all good citizens to obey the directions of the several departments, according to the construction of the constitution which each department may put upon their own acts, until such acts are repealed or annulled by the decision of a higher department, as constituted by the constitution. We liold, thei-efore, that the question with regard to the settlement of the territories belonging to a nation, must be adjusted according to tlie interests of the whole people of the nation, and not by that of a majority of mere voters, unless the con- stitution of the nation has clearly defined some other manner of deciding. It is true the majority may assume the right to make their own construc- tion upon their powers under the constitution, and they may attempt to maintain the doctrine to which they give their political support. But in the exercise of this right, they should not allow their prejudices to govern them ; they should confine their action entirely within the rules of justice and comity toward all men. They should refrain from committing any overt acts which might lead to the infringement of the riglits of their fellow citizens, whctlicr the exercise of those rights accords with their own views or not. All controversies wliich may arise between the people, should be settled upon a basis of ecjual justice to all who may have any interest in the settlement of the (juestion in dispute. It is the duty of every citizen of the United States to remember that before the constitution of tlie United States was adopted, each state was a free and independent government, and that the people of those govern- ments were not compelled by any compact or agreement of whatever kind to jeopardise aoy of their personal interests for the good of tiiose residing in another state. Nor were they called upon to furnish their: aid to sustain any other state except the one m which they resided, unless as friendly neioflibors against a common foe, and as children of a common ancestry. Justice, then, compels us to consider that the formation of the present sys- tem of general government was an act which was entered into by the people of the several states for the protection of the interests of all, indi- vidually and collectively, and when they adopted our present form of government each sought primarily his own protection, and conceded to all the rest the same right, while all would aid in assisting each other when necessary. Having such feelings, and such important objects to stimulate them, it is not surprising that some were willing to concede a portion of their personal rights in oi'der that other rights might be better protected. To fully appreciate the bles,^ings and advantages to be derived by us as a people, in consequence of the establishment of the constitution, it is necessary that we should fully understand the rights to which all others are entitled, in order that we may more fully comprehend our own. All men are so created that they cannot subsist alone, and become as perfect as nature intended them to become ; they are therefore necessarily compelled to seek for association with their fellow men, in order to protect and preserve their intellectual and other powers, so that they may enjoy the life and pleasures of rational beings. If men do not keep up their associations with each other, they soon lose those refined sentiments and feelings which are so essential to their interests and happiness. But as each man is endowed with the right to live and enjoy himself, each shall also recognize that right for others, and thus command respect for himself. It therefore becomes the duty of every man to endeavor to promote the happiness of all, and thus lay a solid foundation for the mutual benefit of all who are members of the community. To form a society upon such a basis, is to establish certain defined rights which are to be enjoyed by the people who constitute such society. All men, being subject to the laws of nature, are entitled to the enjoyment of all the rights which nature has guaranteed to them. And although they may form themselves into societies, yet they do not cease to be men, and as men to remain free and independent, except so far as they are restricted by their obligations to the society to which they belong, and which they have joined with the sole object of protection of these rights. When a man becomes a member of society he does not, in reality, relinquish those rights which nature gave him. He merely changes the manner of procuring them and the means by which they are to be pro- tected. He should still retain his right to hold property, and enjoy the liberty to go and come at his pleasui'e, and otherwise seek for his own interests ; but he cannot do these things in violation of the natural or protected rights of those who are his equals in such society. As the right to hold property is a natural right, and is that which is brought in question in the present territorial controversy, we will consider that right in its several bearings. CHAPTER II. OF THE TITLE TO PERSONAL PROPERTY. The law of nature, which grants to man the right to hold dominion over all things in the world, is fully set forth in the 26th, 27th, and 28th verses of the first chapter of Genesis. This " higher law " than that of man's _ 4 — making reads as follows : "And God said let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth over the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowls of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." The dominion of Man being thus clearly established by Divine Law, the question arises, " What particular part of the animal creation is Man ?" To answer this question we must ascertain which part of the animal crea- tion is the most competent to maintain a dominion over all the other parts. And to establish this fact we have only to show what particular part of the animal creation has held, and continues to hold, dominion over all the other parts of creation. The history of the world teaches us that the white race has held that dominion, and our own experience and observa- tion teach us that he holds that dominion now. In no part of the world's history, so far as we are informed, has any other class of the animal crea- tion than the white race held the supreme dominion over the world. The negro, as also many of the beasts of the forest, have had, and continue to hold, temporary sway over many of the weaker of the animal creation ; but wherever the white race appears in sufficient force to sway, by mental or physical power, tlie mere brute force of the animal in possession has always had to give way to the superiority of the wliite race. The real progress and civilization of the world has always been projected and developed by the white race. We therefore claim that the white men of the present day are the "Man" whom God declared should hold dominion over the world and all things therein. It may be claimed that the negro has sprung from man, and is therefore man, and that this mere difterence of color from the white does not deprive him of his right to hold dominion in connection with the white race, because that color may have been produced by the climate or the soil where he originated. To those who hold this doctrine we say, if the climate or soil will change the complexion, will it also make the nose more flat, the hair more like wool, and the formation of the liead and limbs more like the lower order of animals? And will it reduce a man to almost the level of the brute, by fastening upon his system the same disgusting smell and many of the most beastly instincts of the lower class of animals? Do soil and climate so aft'ect the negro as to deprive him, as a race, of all inclination to rise from the degradation of the brute to become "a man after God's image?" If soil and climate will do all these things, why will not a change of soil and climate also change these ditfercnces of nature, and bring the negro somewhat nearer to the image of his maker? Has such cliange of position ever done these things? lias the negro ever become the equal to man in intellect or mental ca])acity in any climate or on any soil ? Has the negro ever attained those higlier spheres of civili- zation wherever he has had the entire control of his own affairs and actions ? To all these queries the answer must be that history does not furnish us with one instaace to controvert our position. It does not refer us to a single nation populated by the negro the affairs of which have ever attained to tiiat position in human progress and civilization, which has been in a continual state of development since the world began under — 5 — the direction of tlie white race. The ancient Mexicans and Peruvians, although we have no knowledge of their ever having held communion with the other branches of the human family, enjoyed a great degree of civilization when found by the Europeans, but no one has ever found more than the remotest idea of that civilization or cultivation among the negroes of Africa, although they have always been in immediate proximity to civilized Europe and cultivated Asia. We say, then, that the physical fo$mation and color, or complexion of a man, denote his right by the laws of nature to hold dominion over all things having being in the world. God, it appears, made but one man, and that one man was either white or black, as those are the only two animals in the world which can in any way be considered as being made after the likeness, or in the image of God. But these two animals, white and black, being by nature so dif- ferent in many important particulars, therefore only one of the two can by any possibility be considered as the "• Man " which " God made to his own image, to hold dominion over the world." Whichever one it is, he must of right hold dominion over the other, as well as over every other thing which moves upon the earth or in the sea. The title to pei'sonal property is either absolute or qualified. An abso- lute title denotes a full and complete ownership and conti'ol over the prop- erty so held. A qualified title in personal property denotes a temporary or special interest, held by the owner or possessor, which is liable to be totally lost or converted, on the happening of some particular event, which event must be known and fully defined at the time when such property was acquired. The qualified ownership in property may be understood from the nature of the thing or chattel possessed. The ownership of air, light, and water cannot be considered absolute, because they are common by the law of nature, and are comprised among, the elements of nature ; but a horse, or other domestic animal, is not so considered, it not being elementary, and therefore subject to the control of the superior being, Man. Having the right to acquire absolute property in the inferior animal, it is reasonable to suppose that he has acquired that absolute ownership, and he cannot be divested of it unless by his own consent. If any one should take his property from one state to another, in which there exists a law to deprive him of that ownership, he will, of course, lose his control and ownership of that property. The state being a sovereignty, it has an undoubted right to enact such a law, as far as that sovereignty is concerned, and the man, having entire control of his own acts, has an equal right to go into such state or remain out of it. If, under these circumstances, he should go into such state and remain therein until he becomes a citizen thereof, he is bound by its laws, and must release his ownership in such property, because he has voluntarily brought it within the influence of those laws. But if the right to take his property, of whatever nature, into any of the states, is guaranteed by the constitution of the United States, then of course all state laws which conflict with this constitution must be inopera- tive. Where the ownership or title to personal property is absolute, it carries with it the right to use that property in such manner, and in such places as the owner may desire, provided he does not transgress the laws of nature, or the constitutional laws of the nation in which he may be. The rights which pertain to real property are in many cases similar to those which belong to property personal. If a man has an absolute title in real estate, he cannot transfer that property from one phice to another, but he can transfer the title thereof at his pleasure, or change the use of — 6 — such property as lie may deem proper. But where he holds a joint right Aith others, they all have equal rights in the property, unless the title is otherwise defined. And if they are joint tenants in the title, they must be equal in their riglits to use the px'operty, either to settle upon it, to lease or grant it out to others. When exercising this right, they have also the right to take with them such property as they may choose, especially if they were the owners of such property at the time such property was acquired ; and the other joint tenants cannot refuse this right, although some of that property may not be aclcnowledged to be personal property by those who are joint tenants with him in the real estate. He can take it there and use it upon such land, and no one has the right to molest him, even if all those who arc connected with him in the ownershi]i of the land are opposed to the holding of such personal property. Tlie rights of every man are protected by the laws of his country, which empowers him to exercise his own judgment with regard to his own acts in the manage- ment of his property. These rights are absolute, and cannot be subject to the influences of the opinions or prejudice of particular men or parties, however much they may be opposed to his exercise of such rights. The right to hold and possess personal property, like that in real, is acquii-ed by the laws of nature, but the retention and disposal of it is protected and regulated by the laws of the community in which the person lives who holds such ownership ; and those laws extend into all parts of the domain which belong to such community, or in which it has any inter- est, although other sections of the community in which there are different local laws may possess an ecpial interest therein. If this interest is affected by the acts of such other communities, although there may be but one individual alFccted thereby, it is an infringement upon the legal right of the whole community, and should not be permitted to remain unredressed. In the consideration of the rights of men, we are compelled to define them according to the laws of nature as comprehended among men, both as individuals and as communities. But in so considering them, we should not forget that the laws of nature are perfect, while man's judgment is imperfect, and therefore subject to misunderstanding. If one man, or one set of men claim that the laws of nature justify him or them to exercise any particular rights, and the laws of their commuuitj'^ justify him' also in such exercise, no other man or set of men have a right to resist such exercise, although the act may" be repugnant to their feelings. Having thus defined the title and rights to hold and use personal prop- erty, we will now show how this title may be acquired. The right which man possesses to hold property has been conferred upon him by the laws of nalure, which created a necessity in the affairs of men firthe possession of property ; and this necessity being absolute, the right can not be justly taken from him, as the laws of nature have not imposed upon man any obligations which cannot be fulfilled and executed according to those laws. Man is, therefore, endowed with an absolute right to property, and nothing can properly destroy that right, because nothing can relieve man from ful- filling his obligations to nature. TJie right which man has to hold property being natural, his exercise of that right cannot be made a question between one man and another, unless that othef can show that he has a superior right to ownersliip of the same property. To obviate as much as possible the trouble of defining the ownership to property by the mere assertion of those who are interested, the governments of nations have established certain rules, by which the acquirement and retention of such property may be regulated. These rules having become absolute, the title to the property has become absolute according to the manner in Avhicli this ownership may have been acquired and retained by the person claiming to be its owner. If a person acquires an ownership to any property through the rules established by any government, he cannot be deprived of that ownership by the action of that government or by an individual, unless he is fully remunerated for the value thereof at the time when he is compelled to relinquish his ownership. The government, it is true, may not have con- ferred such ownership, but as it had regulated the manner by which such property had been acquired, it is bound to make his loss good, although it should be clearly demonstrated that the public interest requires such ownership to be destroyed. The government having held out inducements to the people to purchase such property, it is bound to protect that prop- erty when it has been so purchased. We hold, therefore, when a property has been so acquired, and in consequence cannot be taken from the owner without full compensation, that its use cannot be restricted by the govern- ment or any one else belonging to the government. If the government should enforce this manifest injury or injustice upon one class of property, it has the same right to exercise the same powers upon all other classes of property. No one has a right to deprive another of the possession of his property upon strictly moral grounds, for those principles of morality which he may possess may not be the same as those held by another. But if one man has a joint title, or if he thinks he has a title in the property held by another, he should be permitted to aiaintain that title, atid take the property if his is adjudged to be the best title. To make the ownership to property of any avail to its possessor, it must be pei-manent ; to be permanent, such property should be absolute, or, if it is not absolute, it should be fully defined, so that he can justly estimate the true value of its ownership at the time he acquires it. When the fundamental laws of a government definfe what constitutes property, no subsequent action can deprive those who hold property from retaining it at their pleasure, and the government is bound to protect the owners in their rights by the exertion of all its powers, if necessai-y. The government is also compelled to sustain such citizens in the full exercise of their legal rights, whether they have removed from the place in Avhich they acquire such ownership or not, provided, however, they do not remove beyond the jurisdiction of the government with the intention of changing their residence, in which case they will, of course, relinquish their rights of protection from such government. CHAPTER III. OF THE TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY. The possession of domain is acknowledged by all nations as prima facie evidence of the title to such domain. But as such possession may have been obtained by a forcible entry and retention, or by a permit from another, and subject to certain conditions, the mere possession does not, thei'efore. always constitute or prove the possessor to be the actual owner of such domain. For a nation to hold this ownership in full, it must pos- sess the inherent right to dispose of it as may seem most advisable, and when it possesses that right, no one else can have any claim to it whatso- ever, unless they obtain their rights therein as citizens of such nation. It is evident, then, that a nation should have an absolute authority over its domain, if it claims the right to dispose of it, or control the use or occupancy thereof. When we speak of the absolute authority of a nation over its domain, wo compi-ehend in that authority full power over the title to the land, and all its acquisitions, made by whatever means which are just in themselves, and all the rights which pertain thereto. And these rights to convey, carry with them the control of all the affairs con- nected with the people residing thereon, or with the land. It is easy, therefore, for us to ascertain who is the real owner of the lands, provided it can be shown in whom the right to sell and dispose of the lands is vested. And this manner of settling the question will apply to the territories of the United States, as well as to any other nation or people. We will, therefore, so apply it, and establish the title to the territories, and also show in whom they rest, and who has the entire con- trol of them. As the government of the United States receives its powers and being from the people, so are the people subject to the control of the government to that extent which they have empowered the government to control them, and no further. It is, therefore, necessary for the people to guard well their rights, so that the government does not assume the exercise of powers which do not belong to it, and which may lead to the impoverish- ment of the people, by restricting them in the exercise of their reserved rights for their individual advancement and interests. If the people are not prosperous the government cannot be prosperous. If the citizens of a country are not free the government cannot be independent. If the rights of the citizens are not respected and maintained, the acts of the govern- ment will not be duly respected and sustained. It being necessary, as we have shown, for a nation to have absolute control over land, before it can be called the real owner, and that this right of control arises from the title only, it becomes our duty to investigate the title to the territories of the United States, and from the result of our investigation, decide which part of the government is invested with the power of control over them. The people of the United States having established our government upon a certain restricted basis, and conferred its powers upon several different departments, giving to each certain well defined powers, which are to be exercised only within their particular spheres, and without encroaching upon the rights or powers of any of the others — this basis being made permanent and imperative, becomes the fundamental law of the land, and as such must be obeyed, making it obligatory upon each department to refrain from exercising any power of doubtful character. For, as those powers are granted by the people, they should not be exer- cised against the ])eople, nor any department which they have established. This princii)le in governmental power has been acknowledged by all the writers upon the subject, in all ages and in all countries. Now, if under the powers thus granted to it, a government is not expressly empowered to purchase or otherwise acquire territory, and dispose of the same after it has been acquired, it cannot be considered as the real owner of any territory acquired by the United States, however it may be acquired, but is merely the trustee lor the people, who are the founders and supporters of the government; and as such trustee it can only act for the bonetit of the whole people, and not for the advantage of a particular — 9 — class or portion of the people. Its powers as such trustee not being fully defined," and the exercise of them being merely an assumption, it behooves the government to act without partiality or improper partisan bias. All the people, from every part of the country, should be allowed to partici- pate in and fully enjoy all the benefits to be derived from the possession and occupation of such territory, according to their own particular require- ments and respective interests, in the same manner and to the same extent in which they occupy and enjoy the territory within their own special jurisdiction, as citizens of a state, excepting, of course, the exercise of those rights which do not pertain to a territory, but which do attach to a sovereign state. The settlers in the territories being citizens of the several states, as well as citizens of the United States, their right, as such citizens, to intro- duce the institutions of their respective states into the common territory cannot be relinquished. <-ither by themselves or by their representatives ; so that the rights of those who may come after them into the territory may not be infringed upon. If any portion of those citizens should introduce into such territory any profession or institution which is recognized as legal by the constitution of the United States and that of the state from whence they come, the other part of the people residing in such territory, or the government itself, have no right to interfere to suppress or restrain their introduction, or in any way to attempt to prevent tliose persons froia the exercise of such natural and legal rights. The people of the United States being the owners of such territories, and having an equal right in their common property and occupancy, each ought to be permitted to enjoy without molestation all the advantages arising from that common ownership, which does not in any way interfere with its common use. None should be permitted to change or destroy a common water-course, or otherwise disarrange any of the general rights of his fellow tenants ; so should none attempt to suppress the exercise of the full rights of others in regard to the kind of labor they may employ. Nor can the government of the United States, or of the several states, interfere with the people in the exercise of these rights. This privilege or right is demanded for the whole people of the United States, upon tlie ground that the whole people, not having granted the power of interference or the right to regulate the same, to the general gov- ernment, or to any particular branch of government connected therewith, such rights naturally remain with and belong to the whole people, who are thus empowered to exercise the same rights therein, which they could do when they established the general government of the United States. They are only subject to such restrictions as they imposed upon themselves when they adopted the federal constitution, and the organic acts under which they might form their territorial govei-nment. But this territorial government being temporary in its form, and being authorized by the constitution only for the protection of the interests in the territory of the United States, the exercise of its powers cannot be considered as possessing all the sovereign riglits of a state. The title to the land being held in trust for the whole people by the government of the United States, a portion of the people can not exercise supreme control over it, or of the institutions which the people, or any portion of them, may establish within or upon such territory, so long as those institutions are recognized as legal by any of the states of the Union. Their i)owers as a part of the whole i)eople of the United States are paramount to those granted under the organic law, and of course their superior obligation is to- the whole people. — 10 — The title of the territories being vested in the whole people of the Union, and such people being the founders and only supporters of the government, none of their riglits can be affected until the people of such territory have formed themselves into one of the great divisions of the government, namely, a state, to do which they are compelled to pass through the regular stages of progress, as required by the provisions of the federal constitution and the laws enacted under them. When they do this, they then assume all the rights and powers which have been conferred upon that division by the whole people, as established by the provisions of the constitution. We. therefore, claim that the title to the territories of the United States is vested in the whole people, and, being so vested in them, they alone constitute that division of the government which can exercise the entire control over them, and even that control can only be had by the whole people, and not by a mere majority thereof. Tlie rights of each being derived from and reguhited by the laws of nature, they cannot be restricted, except by their own joint action. When*^ the people formed the several grand divisions of our present government, they granted to each certain detined powers ; those several divisions cannot, therefore, exercise any other powers than those which had thus been granted, even if a large majority of the people should express themselves favorably to any such divisions exercising certain powers which had not been specially granted. If they were permitted to do this there would be no security to a man ia his possession of life, liberty, or property. All men are endowed wilii certain inherent rights, over Which no majority can or should have any control ; because, should any ever become possessed of that power, the original possessor of those rights would cease to be independent, nor could he exercise his natural rights. The whole people having formed the government, they must be considered the absolute power in the state, which power they have used in forming that government, and it having' been made by the whole people, it cannot be overthrown except by the whole people. Nor can those powers which have been reserved to the whole be exercised by any portion of the whole, without infringing upon the reserved rights of the other portion. If the history of man has taught him to seek for protection from the tyranny of his government by the establishment of several distinct parts, granting to each certain independent powers, those several parts cannot maintain their respective functions unimpaired unless they are secured in the free exercise of the powers so granted, each from the other. At the same time, for one part or division to be free from the interference of another, it must itself refrain from interfering with the acknowledged or clearly established powers of that other. CHAPTER IV. Ol-" IIIK si.VERAL ORANn DIVISIONS OF POWER ESTABLISHED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. When a people are determined to retain in their own hands the control of their own affairs in matters of a personal nature, they can do so, pro- vided that, v.hen they establish a government, they are willing to surrender a part of their inclividual rights for the greater certainty of being secured in the enjoyment of the remainder. In doing this they will establish two — 11 — authorities — one the public, the other tlie private. The public authority — the truest freedom being sought— should be established upon a fundamen- tal basis, by which the exercise of such authority shall be clearly deter- mined, and the manner of using it be regulated. This can only be done by the adoption of a constitution, in the provisions of which shall be found the power by which the nation is to act as a body, and how and by whom the people shall be governed. Hence, as the people surrendered only a part of their naturai rights when they formed this government, it is but just to suppose that the remainder of those rights should not be interfered with, either by the chosen governors, or by any of the people, while acting in their respective spheres. >.; When a nation adopts a constitution, that act does not become the con- trolling power of the state ; it is merely a protecting power. Its provisions were not agreed to with a view that it should control the natural actions of the peopTe, but simply to protect them against the encroachments of the rulers, and the disposition of improper interference of one part of the people with another. A constitution is, then, nothing more than an organic law, which establishes no acts but fundamental acts, the influence of which should extend over and through the whole nation, defending all interests alike, and restraining none, except such as may violate the functions of the general government. Those laws are made directly with a view to the public welfare, and to the well being of society. Those laws which govern the people in their intercourse with one another are called civil laws, deriving their power entirely from the local circumstances of particular sections of the nation, and extending their power only over such sections. If the federal government should enact general laws, with the intention that they should regulate the local afiairs of every section of the country, it is easy to perceive that, in a nation like the United States, such general laws would conflict with the natural rights of the people of some sections, and violate some of their best interests. The constitution and the laws growing out of it having been established as the basis of public tranquillity, the support of the public authority, and the security and the liberty' of the citizen, should be respected at all times, and under all circumstances, by those who govern, and also by those who are governed. If we attack or thwart the free exercise of the constitution and the laws enacted under.it, we are guilty of a most heinous crime against society at large, as well as a^inst ourselves ; because, if any can violate the laws with impunity when they do not happen to con- form to their own individual and peculiar notions of right, others might think themselves justified in other violations, even if by so doing they should endanger the safety and honor of the nation ; the result of which would be to subvert the whole fabric of the government and of society. History teaches us that every nation should guard well against the en- croachments of the people of any other country or nation upon then- rights. And any people who should be so lost to honoras to willingly allow their rights to be infringed upon by another nation, should not complain if made the slaves of those possessed of more spirit and deter- mination than themselves. And this principle is equally as applicable to the people of the different sections of the same country. The several divisions into which the people of the United States have distributed their governing powers may be thus described : First, tiie three fourths of all the states, when acting in unison upon a measure which has been properly brought before the whole number of states in the Union ; second, a majority of voters, when acting under the regulations established — 12 — by themselves ; tliird, llie congressional or legislative power ; fourth, the presidential or executive power of the general government ; and fifth, the judicial power. When the people initiated the proceedings for forming the present con- stitution, and, under it, the general governnaent of the United States, they were acting as a body politic, under what was called the '• Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union between the States." The first article in that fundamental law reads thus : " The style of this confederacy shall be, ' The United States of America.' " The second reads : " Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, juris- diction, and right which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States in congress assembled." These articles were formed, as the preamble thereto states, by " the undersigned delegates of the states affixed to our names." After the preamble come the names of the several states which were parties to the confederation, thus accrediting the states as the contracting parties, without reference to the people of the states. The general gov- ernment of the United States continued to act as such, under the articles of confederation, until tlie 4th of March, 1780, when, by the resolution which had been passed on the 13th of September, 1788, the constitution of the United States, which had been adopted and ratified by the people of the original states, then went into full operation ; thereby forming a more perfect union of the people for the government ok the PEOPLE OF THE UnITED StATES OF AMERICA. The present constitution of the United States, having been adopted by the people as the fundamental law of the land, the articles of confederation were annulled ; but the existence of the states, as independent and sover- iegn powers, was retained by Article X. in the amendment to the consti- tution, which reads: "The powers not delegated to tlie United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." The people, it is now admitted, were then and are now acknowledged to be the supreme power of the land ; and being such, they have the undoubted right to organize themselves into a body politic, under such forms and restrictions as they may deem proper; and when they have sa formed themselves, they can only be changed by the taking of those proceedings which are prescribed by the constitution itself. If all the people in the United Stated except some one individual, were to adopt any particular measure which was in violation of any one of the provisions established in the constitution, it could not be enforced, unless by violating the right of the one individual who was opposed to the measure. The constitution would first have to be changed in that provision which restricts in such general act against the public interest or power. The power which the people possess has been thus restricted by their own act, which act ihving been made for the public and ])rivate interests of the people, each and evary one having relinquished some of their natural rights for the public good, no particular portion of the people can again assume the exercise of those rights, unless by consent of the whole, as provided by the federal constitution. In forming the constitution of the United States, the people exercised those rights which are inherent to all belonging to a free and enlightened nation. They voluntarily surrendered, as we have belbre stated, a part of their rights to a power created by themselves, for the purpose of guaran- teeing to themselves greater security in the exercise of those rights which — 13 — they retained. The powers which they relinquished were not placed in the hands of those whom they appointed to exercise them to be used indiscriminately or Avithout restriction. They established a certain form of government and divided it into several independent parts, conferring upon each certain defined powers, bejond which neither of them were permitted to proceed. This exercise of their power is strong evidence that the people designed to establish each branch of the government upon a special basis, acting independently of the others, and yet, by reason of its powers being clearly defined, each should act only as a part of the whole government. It has been asserted by some of our leading statesmen that it was not the people who made the constitution, but the states. This cannot be so, for the preamble to the constitution informs us to the contrary. It says : ^' We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America." This preamble establishes beyond question the l\ict tliat the constitution is the creation of the people of the United States, and not of the states themselves. It is true that the states existed, as free and independent states, before the constitution was adopted, but their independence was sustained by the people and by them only ; and that independence still remains with them, except so far as the people deemed it necessary to relinquish a part thereof to the general government, for the purpose of creating a uniti/ of action and of strength for the general good and defence. The first grand division of the powers of the general government is described in Article V. of the' constitution, which says that the constitution may be amended by the ratification '^ of the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof." The powers conferred upon this division are therefore clearly defined to be that of amending the constitution. The second grand division is that of the majority of the people as voters at the election of rulers, either in a legislative, executive, or judicial capacity. They can do this eitlier by their own vote or by the votes of those whom they may have authorized to act for them, who are generally understood to be the legislators. The power of this division is confined entirely to the election of the rulers of the government. The third grand division is that of congress, which has had conferred upon it by section first of Article I., all the legislative powers granted in the federal constitution. The fourth grand division of the powers of the government conferred by the constitution, are those found in section one of Article II., which says that " the executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America." This power is defined by the constitution to consist in his being the commander- in-chief of the army and navy, and of the state militia, when in actual service. He makes treaties with foreign countries, under the advice of the senate ; nominates, and with the advice of the senate appoints ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, judges of the supreme court, and sucli other officers which are not otherwise provided for in the constitution ; he can also fill all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the senate, in any of the above offices, lie must from time to time give to congress infor- mation of the state of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall choose ; he can convene both houses of congress — 14 — or either of them, or, if they cannot agree between them to adjourn at a specified time, he may adjourn them ; he receives the ambassadors and other public ministers ; commissions all the officers of the United States, and must take care that the laws are faithfully executed. The fifth grand division of the government is defined in section one of Article III. to be " the judicial power of the United States," which, as therein stated, " shall be vested in one supreme court, and such inferior courts as the congress may from time to time ordain or establish." The first grand division of the powers of the general government having been established solely for the purpose of amending the federal constitu- tion, it cannot exercise any other powers but this one, and only this after it has been requested to do so by those other powers referred to in the constitution. The second grand division of power having been established for the purpose of ascertaining the will of a majority of the people with regard to ■who shall serve them as rulers and representatives of their wishes with regard to the management of their public affairs, they cannot exercise any other powers but this. Their powers having been granted them by the ■whole people in their several organic acts, of general as well as of special powers, they cannot exercise any other powers without injury to them- selves and others who, as their equals, may disagree with them in such matters. This division of the powers of the government having been thus created, those whom it places in power can only act to the extent which has been defined in the organic act. A mere majority of the people is not compe- tent to take in its hands the just rights of the minority. Such majority is only authorized by the constitution to act upon matters which may be in their nature, in accordance with the provisions of the constitution, and cannot, therefore, extend its powers beyond it, or assume the right to act under the law of nature, or the " higher law," as it is sometimes called. They (the majority) may advocate a measure of public policy, and elect men to offices under the national government ; but if the enforcement of that measure of public policy would be a violation of the fundamental laws of the land, it cannot be enforced, even if the majority has given its sanction to such enforcement. If the violation of the fundamental laws should proceed from the enforcement of such measure, by a branch of the government which is not empowered by such laws to exercise such powers against another branch, the majority has no right to even advocate such measures, much less enforce them. By doing so, they not only intermed- dle with the affairs of their equals, but may endanger their interests, by creating a false prejudice against them, which might end in the most bitter hatred of one against the other. If such majority of the people should suc- ceed in electing a majority of the represeutatfves in the congress of the United States, or in the legislatures of the several states, or in any partic- ular state, such majority cannot exercise powers which are not expressly conferred by the constitution under which they act and receive their functions. The legislative power and the majority, both having received their powers fi-om the whole people, cannot, of course, exercise any powers not granted to them. If they did, they would assume an equality of power with their superiors and creators. A majority not having the power to remit the restrictions of the funda- mental laws of the land, it is certainly reasonable to refuse to a mere plurality the exercise of such power, although it might be able to elect a majority of the representatives in congress, or members of the various legislatures. — 15 — When the people elect an officer of the federal or state governments, they elect him for a particular purpose, and by virtue of particular powers, only and specially invested in them. And, although such officer may receive every vote in the district he is elected to represent, he is unauthor- ized to go beyond the powers for which he has been elected. The greater number of the votes cast, is required to insure his election over that of his opponent, to fill a position, the duties of which have been estab- lished by the whole people, before he could have been elected at all. He cannot, therefore, claim to act under the "higher law," as interpreted by himself It Avas not the " higher law " which placed him there, nor was it the "higher law" which he has sworn to obey. He was placed in his position under the organic law, and he must act under it, or resign his position back to its original creators, if he is not willing to be governed, and abide by, such restrictions as it imposes upon him. The third grand division of power being that of the congress of the United States, the powers which are conferred upon this grand division are described in section eight of Article I. of the constitution, which says that "the congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, pay debts, provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States, borrow money, regulate commerce, establish naturalization and bankrupt laws, coin money, regulate the value of both domestic and foreign coins, fix the standard of weights and measures, provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the nation, establish post offices and post routes, promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective wu'itiiigs and discoveries, constitute new courts inferior to the supreme court, define and punish piracies and ^^felonies committed on the high seas, and ofiences against the laws of nations, declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, make rules concerning captures on land and water, raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, make rules for governing and regulating the land and naval forces, provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions, provide for the organization of the militia, exercise all legislative power over the District of Columbia, all places purchased by the United States by the consent of the legislature of the state in which it shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other need- ful buildings, prohibit any time after 1808 the migration of white men or the importation of negroes, determine the time of choosing electors and the day on which they shall give their votes for president and vice-presi- dent, declare the punishment of treason, admit new states into the Union, dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the terri- tory or other property belonging to the United States ; with the President, it shall guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of govern- ment, and protect each of them from invasion and domestic violence, make its own rules for the regulation of its business when in session ; and make all laws which shall be necessary, and for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or olficer thereof" The fourth grand division of the powers of government being the executive, we will state that the constitution defines these powers to be that of carrying out or enforcing the laws enacted by congress and such other matters as we have referred to above. The fifth grand division — the judiciary — is empowered by the constitu- ^ — 16 — tion to decide upon all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made or which shall be made under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls ; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction ; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party ; to controver- sies between two or more states ; between a state and citizens of another state ; between citizens of different states ; between citizens of the same state, claiming lands under grants of different states ; and between a state or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects. In Article XI. of the amendments to the constitution, the powers of the supreme corut are defined not "to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prose- cuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state." The several powers here refei'red to, as belonging to the different grand divisions of the government, are so specifically defined that we do not believe any one can go astray in construing them. And any measure which does not conform to them under their proper head, cannot be con- sidered subjected to them, but to some other power not directly referred to in the constitution. That power consists of the several states, which we referred to in our quotations from Article X. of the amendments to the constitution. When the people of the several states were agitating the question of establishing a general government during the existence of the confedera- tion, they were not influenced to the support of such an organization from a wish to create one which should interfere with their state or territorial affiiirs, nor did they intend that its powers should be such as to enable the people of one state to meddle with the local affairs of the people of another. The whole controversy which led to the formation of the present govern- ment, is fully set forth in the report of a committee appointed by the con- gress of the confederation, which consisted of IMr. Monroe, Mr. Spaight, Mr. Houstoun, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. King. Mr. Monroe, the cliairman of this committee, made a report to the congress of the confederacy, on Wednesday, July 13, 1785. In that report it was maintained, that the states could not become prosperous unless there was established more equanimity in their internal commerce among themselves, and as well, "with foreign countries. The committee held that " The common principle upon which a friendly commercial intercourse is conducted between inde- pendent nations is that of reciprocal advantages, and if this is not obtained, it becomes the duty of the losing party to make such further regulations, consistently with the failh of treaties, as will remedy the evil and secure its interests. If, then, the commercial regulations of any foreign power contravene the interests of any particular state — if they refuse admittance to its produce into its parts upon the same terms that the state admits its manufactures here — what course will it take to remedy the evil ? If it makes similar regulations to counteract those of that power, by reciprocating the advantages which it feels, by impost or otherwise, will it produce the desired eflfect? will they enter into similar regulations and make it a common cause? On the contrary will they not, in pursuit of the same local policy, avail themselves of this circumstance to turn it to their par- ticular advantage? Tims, then, we behold tiie i>everal states taking sepa- rate measures in pursuit of their particular interests in opposition to the regulations of foreign powers, and separately ;iiding those powers to defeat the regulations of ^'ach other; for, unless the .-states act together, there is no plan of policy into which they can separately enter, which tliey will not — 11 — be separately interested to defeat, and, of course, all their measures must prove vain and abortive." To remedy the evils here complained of, Mr. Monroe recommended the states to confer upon the congress the sole and exclusive right and power of determining on peace and wai", except when a state is invaded ; of rendering and receiving ambassadors ; entering into treaties and alliances; of regulating the trade of the states, as well with foreign nations as with each other, and of laying such impost and duties upon imports and exports as may be necessary for the purpose ?" It is evident, from these and other acts of the Fathers of the Republic, that their whole object in forming the present government was that of advancing the commercial interests of the various states, not by interfering with their local affiiirs, but solely by exercising a supervision over those matters which had, or might have, a direct effect upon the extensive lead- ing interests of them all. Tliey did not design that the general government should use its powers for the purpose of controlling the progress of those interests, either collectively or separately, but solely to protect them from injury through the influence of foreign powers, and the selfish policy of the states in their intercourse with each other. We defy any one to refer to one clause in the constitution which does not bear on its face pfoof that this was the object and the only one. There existed among th6 states a uniformity of interest, and it was necessary that there should be a unifor- mity of effort to advance those interests, which could only be obtained by a uniformity of protection. CHAPTER V. DOES THE CONSTITUTION I'ROTECT SLAVE AND HIRED LABOR? The establishment of our present system of government by the people of the United States, was for the purpose of securing to themselves the protection of "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ;" to protect their lives from the assaults of their fellow-men, who were strangers or ene- mies ; to protect their liberty from the assaults of tiie government, by restricting its powers within certain clearly defined limits, and by granting to it certain superior powers, by the exereise of which it can concentrate its whole force to defeat the attacks of foreign enemies; to protect them in their pursuit of happiness, by securing to them the right to employ their mental and physical powers in any manner and to such an extent as they may choose, without being interfered with either by their fellow-citizens or by strangers and enemies. Now, as these were the objects for which the people formed the present system of government under which we live, we have only to ascertain the extent of the powers thus granted. In the protection to life the people souglit to secure to themselves immunity from any attempts being made U])on their lives by any one, by establishing so strong a government as would deter such attempts, by the enactment and enforcement of certain penalties to be inflicted for llie committing of such acts. To j^rotect their liberty, they sought to establish certain defined rules of action, by which they could be regulated in the exercise of their natural rights, without being subject to the selfish inter- ference of their f'eiiovv-men, so long as their acts were not in violation of the common interests — which violation they wished to be defined in no uncertain way, so that all could be subject to that established definition. 2 — 18 — To protect themselves in the pursuit of happiness — by reserving to them- selves the ri,._ For 10 copies per annum, $27.50 For 20 " "... 50.00 J" For 50 ■' "... 112.50 For 100 " "... 200.00 Thi Cash to accompany the ordkr in ai,l cases. The first, second, and third numbers of the Review are now issued, the contents of which are as follows : CONTENTS OF NUMBER ONE. Salutatory — The Relation of the Democratic Party to the Government of the United States — History of the Two Years' Amendment to the Constitution of Massachusetts — The Outbreak at Harper's Ferry — The San Juan Question — James Buchanan : Containing a short Outline of his Career — The Appalachian Group of Indian Tribes : A Political Element — The United States Coast Survey— The Production of Cotton, and its Influence on Modern Civilization — Invocation — City of Washington — Quarterly Synopsis of our Foreign Commercial Relations — Alfred Tennyson — Rifles — British Novel- lEte — Death of Governor Hamilton— Stanwix— On the Probable Fall in the Value of Gold. CONTENTS OF NUMBER TWO. Slavery ta. Abolition — The Impending Crisis at the South : How to meet it — Mexico — Salem Witchcraft — Negro Slavery and the Moral Law — The Military Establishment of the United States — Walter Scott — Aerial Navigation — Ancient and Modern Oratory — Quarterly Synopsis of our Foreign Commercial Relations — Northern Notes from a Southern Sketch Book — Archives of Aboriginal Knowledge — Sh«ving : A Satire. CONTENTS OF NUMBER THREE. Slavery tu. Abolition — Southern Wealth and Northern Profits — Politics of the Republican Party — Gort pave the Union (a Song for the Times) — Japan — Social Restrictions — Washington Irving — Military F*tab!ishment of the United States — On seeing a Deer taken by his Hunter — Quarterly Synopsit of cur Foreign Commercial Relations — Sketch of the life of the Hon. Jacob Thompson, Secretary of the Interior — Militia System and Proposed Reorganization — Progress of the Age (a Satire) — A Vidit to the Mines of Pachacamac — Europe and the United States — The Duties of Piiblic Opinion — Lord Macaulay and bis History of England — The Growth of Sardinia. NUMBER FOUR WILL BE ISSUED FROIVI THE PRESS ON THE FIRST OF OCTOBER ENSUING. Complete and thorough arrangements have been made to place Thk Review in a position to insure its permanency. The success which has attended the work has been exceedingly gratifying. The necessity for it. or for a similar pub- lication, none presume to deny. To supply this want will be the aim of the publishers. In this effort, laudable and praiseworthy, the encouraging assistance and countenance of the entire Democratic Party of the Union is solicited. That we will secure this desirable and invaluable aid wc are weH persuaded. It is therefore confidently and fearlessly believed the '• Quarterly" will receive a cordial welcome and a liberal support throughout the land. To attain unquei- tionable success and secure a large circulation, we have fixed the price of sub- scription at the very low rate of J^" Three Dollars a year, payable invariably IN ADVANCE. This will induce, we hope, every Democrat who can do so, with- out injury to himself or family, to spare this trifling sum to determine the per- manent establishment of The Review. We promise on our pari to render them a full and fair equivalent for their generous contributions. We hope ere Ions to be able to chronicle the pleasing fact that the National Democratic Quar- terly Review ha* a fixed and approved place in the hands, household, and heart of every Democrat in the United States. Address — LITTLE, MORRIS & CO., PubUshers, Office of th« National Democratic Quarterly Review, WASHIKGTON CITY, D. C. i>i If ,^^ .0^ ♦•':A!* "^o, a|J> oj^vr* \, '^''\ /.'^-X .^°*'i^'> /<•»•% ^' • JO'' I* - 1 • -^0^ v^«)- ^ ."J^t* V c?^ y^j;^. '°o .4 .0^ ^^.0 9^' ^- ^ V ^o* iO ^"•^^. -. VAO^ \.** «^' ^*^^r .0^ > l4-^ .1 5^ \/ «^^-% * «.^" ^. 5^^