FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500  
501   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   >>   >|  
ith its weakness, by asking its exercise? Why mock it by demanding impossibilities? Petitioning, according to Mr. Wise, is, in matters of legislation, omnipotence itself; the very source of all constitutional power; for, _asking_ Congress to do what it _cannot_ do, gives it the power--to pray the exercise of a power that is _not, creates_ it. A beautiful theory! Let us work it both ways. If to petition for the exercise of a power that is _not_, creates it--to petition against the exercise of a power that _is_, annihilates it. As southern gentlemen are partial to summary processes, pray, sirs, try the virtue of your own recipe on "exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever;" a better subject for experiment and test of the prescription could not be had. But if the petitions of the citizens of the District give Congress the _right_ to abolish slavery, they impose the _duty_; if they confer constitutional authority, they create constitutional obligation. If Congress _may_ abolish because of an expression of their will, it _must_ abolish at the bidding of that will. If the people of the District are a _source of power_ to Congress, their _expressed will_ has the force of a constitutional provision, and has the same binding power upon the National Legislature. To make Congress dependent on the District for authority, is to make it a _subject_ of its authority, restraining the exercise of its own discretion, and sinking it into a mere organ of the District's will. We proceed to another objection. "The southern states would not have ratified the constitution, if they had supposed that it gave this power." It is a sufficient answer to this objection, that the northern states would not have ratified it, if they had supposed that it _withheld_ the power. If "suppositions" are to take the place of the constitution--coming from both sides, they neutralize each other. To argue a constitutional question by _guessing_ at the "suppositions" that might have been made by the parties to it, would find small favor in a court of law. But even a desperate shift is some easement when sorely pushed. If this question is to be settled by "suppositions," suppositions shall be forth coming, and that without stint. First, then, I affirm that the North ratified the constitution, "supposing" that slavery had begun to wax old, and would speedily vanish away, and especially that the abolition of the slave trade, which by the constitution was to be
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500  
501   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Congress

 
constitutional
 
exercise
 

suppositions

 
constitution
 
District
 
authority
 

abolish

 

ratified

 

question


subject
 
petition
 

southern

 
coming
 
slavery
 

creates

 
legislation
 

source

 

states

 

objection


supposed

 

neutralize

 

answer

 

proceed

 

sufficient

 

withheld

 

northern

 
affirm
 
supposing
 

abolition


speedily

 

vanish

 
parties
 

guessing

 

sorely

 

pushed

 

settled

 

easement

 

desperate

 
annihilates

beautiful

 

theory

 

gentlemen

 

virtue

 
processes
 

partial

 

summary

 

demanding

 

impossibilities

 

Petitioning