Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-01-25

essential relations of domestic aud social
lite. Bui this VAS the Tact i'm relation 10
colured persons, as Mr.. A. belle, ed, in
every state o. ne Uni n, without exccp-
lion. Cuiorrd prrsous as ln; been stat
I'd by his coilpag uc. (Nlr. Barbour were
IA 40 part OF the Uuion permitted By tdte,
}" contract with nhiie persons thai en>
yagcmen'. the liberty to contract which
~as the ihsrprre5ie incident and critic.
riou Of al condition OF social equaIitv.-
lie alluded 10 the engagement OF marTi-
age. How could psrsou- be said 10 bee
irhS IL the same ella > who were every
Nhr.e prnhibiied by la. from TIC con.
traction 81 any reid iuu OF in,imace, and
irUm .SnciatiOn, OA HE basis OF social
equality ! II Was finm the influence OF
tins consideration, and not from any oc'
currCuce III various other views, which
had been stated. that Mr.. "A. derived
liscouvIusion HAL col red persons could,
III no part OF the Union, be assigned TO
The rank OF citizens.
Hn', suppose ,hai these persons could
Le assigned 10 lhls rank in some Of the
staies If the UnioT. Admit that there
were ciliZrns Of This description. Ought
iEe clause OF the constitution OF Nilsson
ri, 10 which objection hal been taken,
10 be considered as operating upon such
pt these persons "a we're citizens? Mr..
y. conceived that il ought moi, upon
the established maxim 0i Interpretation,
whl ID had been stated by his freud from
South CMoIIna, (Mr. Lowndes) that
where instruments presented the appear.
.ncr ut cruhici construction was, If
possible, 10 be adopted, which would re.
cnn"ilr tier operation. II there were
cClored persons who belonged to the
class OF ciiizens, there was, VIGOROUSLY,
. much Larger class wllo did not belong 10
tins description, ON ~hom the clause in
question might be considered as operai-
'nE without lie involvemcnt fanny breach
q, The I'D. raj constitution. There was a
hisi!nci p cuilar reason Tor HE adoption
al Ibis conSiTualion. The terms :" FREE
negrOeS ant mnlgttocS," on uhich the doubt
IN ,he present case arose, had acquired
IN the scui'i anh vest au import perfectly
precise, and "a ii might be said tcchni-
ral, d"uotims class who we're invariably
rxrin 'cd ir"m Tue privileges OF ci,iz n
ship ....Io rr>irIrt III. s. words in The
clause AZ The Missouri constitution 10 This
sens, was dong no more than was re-
Qnirei by another established rule al
construction, confirming the words 10
ilirir ordinary and received specification.
There MAS h'itIier force nor liability 10
abuse III Ihi3 Interpretation, bpcause the
ibFOft al me liHSudSc VAS rot enlarged
40 as 10 he made in embrace something
wh Oh II dad noi properly comprehend,
1ut was restricted. IL was another es-
iabl shed rulc, that Ia cases OF doubt.
The nOsi nitigacd construction was 10
be adopted III obscuris Quod minimum
ast quPrmur." Bat, III The srpsent case.
II a - happened that the mast p,lligatrd
was. ai Inc same titne, the n~uai and
most received Specification Of the words
20 be cGustrnei ..... All that was asked,
was, iha' The language should not be dis
tories from its customary and appropri-
aied rapport, aud a description app!ica.
be 80. aUd designed for an inferior class
al persons, be stretched to comprehend
higher class. ~ eoniraventisn of one
oi The most familiar axims, that I" MI
nor non conIinei dor" Gases analo
q rus 10 the present might be easily stat.
Cd from the constitution. Mr.. A. INSANE.
cd the case Of Imports WHICH HE states
were forbidden to lay unless With the
consent &C Congress, or for a special
purpose. II MaSsachu, eiIs, " ho was now
engaged IN The formation of new con-
situation, were 10 inseFia provision grant.
ing lower 10 her legislature tO Law i'm
ports, would any routi or reasonable man
Te'nse 10 ihis Clause construction re-
siSirted by the competency Of Tie s,a,c,
and consise II with lie prohibition of The
federal constitution?
Bat. let il be admitted Tor the pursuit
al the argument, That The c0nIr0vcrl Il
clause 1T the Missouri Constitution was
50 he Goa Sidered rs inconsistent wiih the
federal CONSTITUTION and void. Did iiful.
low iha, The While instrument, aud the
at Cf admission OF the Territory into The
Onion we're, therefore, Varated This
beng gu sIion OF the ju-t Interpreters
ton OF an instrument, must be conceded
- be a jurIiicai question, aud lis deter
,ainalion was. tliefeiofe, to be governed
bv jdridicaI rules. Whal was this CON.
pact we had made with Missouri II
Mas a grant OF tn" privilege Of admission
into the Union. subject 10 a condition. of
The due discharge of an authority TO form
constitution of stale government. Nov
what were the ordinary judicial rules go.
VerDlng HE construction of the valid
execute OF authorities 7 the discharge
were Inconsistent entirely and throughout
Wiib the limitations on Tie authority, then
the grant Of il and all attending advanid.
9es we're vacated, This was in effect
The aaiOHnt Of VIVA had been contend
ed for bl The gentleman from r. nnsyI. |
Vauia, (Nir. S rgeam,) in this b .aurh of !
the discussion. But, ii HE discharge
were lncorSi*t"hi ouly ~ past, II might |
be ~ some very unlmpOIianl part, wish |
the limitations Of the authority whai
was the Inst construction ihen? Was iie |
wbOle discharge aud grant of the auth |
riiy vacated, ~ only ,ur of HdiuE part |
Unqueslionably The later uHly. The |
discharge, so far as II was within fhe |
competency Of he authority was valid,
aHd lof SO mach as il iranscrnded This |
limit II sss void. la fuIc i .ffrlng from !
this prevail q. whai uld be he e.rrci |
~ IL? UndeI color Of the cnrreclinm ni |