UNITED STATES. 



697 



or no slavery in a territory, but that it should 

 be left to the inhabitants to determine when 

 they assembled in convention to form a State 

 constitution. The friends of Mr. Douglas con- 

 sisted of a portion of the Democratic party. 



John C. Breckin ridge was the candidate rep- 

 resenting the principle of protection to slavery 

 in the territories, regarding slaves as a species 

 of property recognized in the Constitution of 

 the United States. After the territories be- 

 come States, the whole question is under their 

 control. The friends of Mr. Breckinridge con- 

 stituted that portion of the Democratic party 

 which did not support Mr. Douglas. 



John Bell was the candidate of a party whose 

 platform was " the Constitution, the Union, and 

 the enforcement of the laws." 



The vote of the people at the election was as 

 follows: Lincoln, 1,857,610; Douglas, 1,365,- 

 976 : Breckinridge, 847,953 ; Bell, 590,631. 



The Government of the United States at this 

 time was composed of the following officers : 



President. James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania. 

 Vice-Pretident. John C. Breckinridge, of Kentucky. 

 Secretary of State. Lewis Cass, of Michigan. 

 Secretary of the Treasury. Howell Cobb, of Georgia. 

 Secretary of War. John B. Floyd, of Virginia. 

 Secretary of the 3~aty. Isaac Toucey, of Conn. 

 Secretary of the Interior. Jacob Thompson, of Miss. 

 Postmaster- General. Joseph Holt, of Ky. 

 Attorney- General. John S. Black, of Pennsylvania. 



The movements in South Carolina early at- 

 tracted the attention of the Government. Some 

 of its members were doubtless informed that 

 measures leading to secession would be imme- 

 diately taken after the day on which the presi- 

 dential election was held ; others probably ap- 

 prehended some movements of this nature, but 

 were not informed what they would probably 

 be. As early as the 20th of November the At- 

 torney-General sent a reply to some questions 

 respecting which his opinion had been asked by 

 the President. These questions related to the 

 obligation of citizens to obey the laws ; to the 

 power of the Government for the collection of 

 duties, for the protection of public property, 

 and to put down unlawful combinations too 

 powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary 

 course of judicial proceedings. On the first 

 question the view taken by the Attorney-Gen- 

 eral was expressed in these words: 



The will of a State, whether expressed in its consti- 

 tution or laws, cannot, while it remains in the Confed- 

 eracy, absolve her people from obeying the just and 

 constitutional requirements of the Central Government. 

 Nor can any act of the Central Government displace 

 the jurisdiction of a State, because the laws of the Unit- 

 ed States are supreme and binding only so far as they 

 are passed in pursuance of the Constitution. I do not 

 say what might be effected by mere revolutionary 

 force. I am speaking of legal and constitutional right. 

 This is the view always taken by the Judiciary, and 

 so universally adopted" that the statement of it may 

 seem common-place. 



With regard to the collection of duties at any 

 port, his views were as follows : 



Where the law directs a thing to be done, without 

 saying how, that implies the power to use such means 

 as'may be necessary and proper to accomplish the end 



of the Legislature. But where the mode of performing 

 a dutjjs pointed out by statute, that is the exclusive 

 mode, and no other can be followed. The United Statei 

 have no common law to fall back upon when the writ- 

 ten law is defective. If, therefore, an Act of Congress 

 declares that a certain thing shall be done by a partic- 

 ular officer, it cannot be done by a different officer. 

 The agency which the law furnishes for its own execu- 

 tion must be used, to the exclusion of all others. For 

 instance, the revenues of the United States are to be 

 collected in a certain way, at certain established ports, 

 and by a certain class of officers ; the President has no 

 authority, under any circumstances, to collect the same 

 revenues at other places, by a different sort of officers, 

 or in ways not provided for. Even if the machinery 

 furnished by Congress for the collection of the duties 

 should by any cause become so deranged or broken up 

 that it could' not be used, that would not be a legal 

 reason for substituting a different kind of machinery 

 in its place. 



The law requires that all goods imported into the 

 United States within certain collection districts shall 

 be entered at the proper port, and the duty thereon 

 shall be received by the collector appointed for and 

 residing at that port. But the functions of the collec- 

 tor may be exercised anywhere at or within the port; 

 there is no law which confines him to the custom- 

 house, or any other particular spot. If the custom- 

 house were burnt down, he might remove to another 

 building; if he were driven from the shore, he might 

 go on board a vessel in the harbor. If he keeps within 

 the port he is within the law. 



The right of the Government over public 

 property is thus explained : 



It is believed that no important public building has 

 been bought or erected on ground where the Legisla- 

 ture of the State in which it is, has not ptssed a law 

 consenting to the purchase of it and ceding the exclu- 

 sive jurisdiction. This Government, then, is not only 

 the owner of those buildings and grounds, but by -rir- 

 tue of the supreme and paramount law, it regulates the 

 action and punishes the offences of all who are within 

 them'. If any one of an owner's rights is plainer than 

 another, it is that of keeping exclusive possession and 

 repelling intrusion. The right of defending the public 

 property includes also the right of recapture alter it 

 has been unlawfully taken by another. President Jef- 

 ferson held the opinion, and acted upon it, that he 

 could order a military force to take possession of any 

 land to which the United States had title, though they 

 had never occupied it before, though a private party 

 claimed and held it, and though it was not then needed 

 nor proposed to be used for any purpose connected 

 with the operations of the Government. This may 

 have been a stretch of Executive power ; but the right 

 of retaking public property in which the Government 

 has been carrying on its lawful business, and from 

 which its officers have been unlawfully thrust out, can- 

 not well be doubted; and when it was exercised at 

 Harper's Ferry, in October, 1859, every one acknowl- 

 edged the legal justice of it. 



The next question asked of the Attorney-Gen- 

 eral, was the most important of all the inqui- 

 ries. His view of it is interesting, as it comprises 

 the ground upon which the succeeding Admin- 

 istration relied at the commencement of its mil- 

 itary operations. 



I come now to the point in your letter which is prob- 

 ably of the greatest practical "importance. By the act 

 of if 07 you may employ such parts of the land and na- 

 val forces as you shall judge necessary for the purpose 

 of causing the laws to be duly executed, in all cases 

 where it is lawful to use the militia for the same pur- 

 pose. By the act of 17t'5 the militia may be called 

 forth " w'henever the laws of the United States shall be 

 opposed, or the execution thereof obstructed in any 

 States by combinations too powerful to be suppressed 

 by the o'rdinary course of judicial proceedings, or by 



