Presidential Candidates:: Containing Sketches, Biographical, Personal and Political, of Prominent Candidates for the Presidency in 1860Bartlett, D. W. (David W.)
History
Presidential Candidates:: Containing Sketches, Biographical, Personal and Political, of Prominent Candidates for the Presidency in 1860
Bartlett, D. W. (David W.)
Statesmen -- United States; United States -- Biography
statute-book; and although he did not vote for it, he explained to
the country why he did not, and expressed his regret that his
absence had prevented him from recording his vote in favor of it.
"From the plain language of the Constitution, as I have read it,
how is it possible for one still claiming to follow the path of
the Constitution, to assert that Congress has no power to
legislate in relation to the subject anywhere? He informs us,
however, that by the Kansas-Nebraska bill, the full power of the
inhabitants of a territory to legislate on all subjects not
inconsistent with the Constitution, was granted by Congress. If
Congress attempted to make such a grant; if Congress thus
attempted to rid themselves of a trust imposed upon them, they
exceeded their authority. They could delegate no such power. The
territorial legislature can be but an instrument, through which
the Congress of the United States execute their trust in relation
to the territories. Therefore it was, that notwithstanding the
exact language of that bill which the senator has read, the
Congress of the United States did assume, and did exercise, the
power to repeal a law passed in that very territory of Kansas,
which they clearly could not have done if they had surrendered all
control over its legislation. Whether the senator voted for that
report or not, I do not know; I presume he did; but whether he did
or not, does not vary the question, except so far as it affects
himself. The advocates of the Kansas-Nebraska bill were generally
the men who most promptly claimed the repeal of those laws,
because they said they were a violation of those rights which
every American citizen possessed under the Constitution.
"But the senator says territorial laws can only be set aside by an
appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. If so, then they
have a power not derived from Congress; they are not the
instruments of Congress. But in the course of the senator's
remarks, and quite inconsistent with this position, he announced
that they possessed no power save that which they derived from the
organic act and the Constitution. They can derive no power from
the Constitution save as territories of the United States, over
which the States have given the power of a trustee to the
Congress; and being the delegate of the Congress, they have such
powers as Congress has thought proper to give, provided they do
not exceed such powers as the Congress possesses. How, then, does
the Senator claim that they have a power to legislate which
Congress cannot revise; and yet no power to legislate at all save
that which they derive from their organic act?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account