Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1840-06-29

the ordinance aforesaid, is entitled theroto; tits
therefore enacted, That every free male nhabitant
oil the age OF twenty-one years. resident IN tlle
Territory and holds freehold Of hliy acres OF
land within any county Of the same OF any less
quantity in the county IN which he resides, whi;h,
with the improvements made thereon, shall DC Of
the value of one hundred dollars, aud who has
paid for, and in virtue Of n deed of conveyance
for further assurances from person vested WIN
The Ice, IS IN actual possession OF fifty acres oil iann
subject to taxation, in the county in which he shall
he resident, shall he, and are hereby declared 10
he duly qualified electors of representatives., for the
counties in which they nre respectively resident
The ordinance of Congress, pissed July 10,
1887, is the document referred TO- mud the follow
ing is the clause of which it was explanatory:
crowded, Also that a freehold in my acres in
the district, having been n citizen OF one of the
states, and being resident in the district, or the
like freehold aud two years residence in the dis
trct, shall he necessary 10 qualify man as an
elector oil representative"
And what was this "ordinauce p why it was
the OILY constitution which Indiana possessed
the sup eme or paramount lac Of hoi te'1itorN
which could not be ahrogaicd or infrinscd upon
by the legislative executive authorities of lndi-
ana. Here, them 10 the most satisfactory reucon
why Harrison did not veto this net on account of
the required freehold: he could mol do it for That
reason that was subject which he could not
touch. Let now revert to the act itself Its OBJ
iect is self EVIDENT nay, sclfexplaned il icdS 10
EXTEND THE RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE 10 The utmost
limit ,chtch The -dindnce IF Congress would ailow.
Where, we beg 10 ask, is the triumph of Mr. Van
Ness! The very act, on which lie relics TO provo
Harrison against the poor mans right Of suffrage,
| wont IN tlo riuI,t tlo
tiola limit! Where is his long win,led argument
10 show that Harrison ought 10 veto this metz Why,
had he vetoed it, he would have thrown the peo-
rle back upon the restrictions Of the ordinance,
requiring the fifty acres cf land, md would have
utterly excluded all those persons admitted by the
explanatory act, viz: those who did not own fifty
acres, but yet whose land, toiM improvements, WIS
valued Mt &l00. So much for Gen HARRISON en-
culpation we now turn to Mr.. Van Ness. lie is
n distinguished lawyer, has been chief justice of
our Supreme Court, and is now II member of the
bar OF the United States Supreme Court: was he
ignorant Of the ordinance of 1857? Why, next to
the Constitution of the United States ITSELF it is
the most important act in existence, touching the
principles OF our gov ,rhment; it is particularly
celebrated MS prohibiting slavery in the vast terri
tory now occupiedby Ohio, Indiana Illinois, Mi
chigan, and Wisconsin and was deemed of such
consequence MS to he published, in the first vol
umcs of U. s. Laws in connection with the Con-
stilution itself 1t is hard for us to believe That
MIR. Van Ness wds ignorant Of Tire act: we will
rather suppose that this provision escaped lis
memory. But then, MIR. Van Ness said he had he
lao before him aud The la,o particularly refers 10
he ordinance. What escape, then, has the orator
from charges OF n most gross and objectionable i'm
position upon his hearers or of criminal negli-
gence i'll not giving the whole facts i'll this case
We vii! give our opinion tits, that he did no. have
the lac beto him, his word to the contrary not
outstanding. We think rather, that he did have
garbcd extract from some vile loco foco news
=, paper: and OIL this he stuked his reputation
. lawyer aud n man of honor! ii his friends
can provide better way of escape for him, W.
. shall he happy 10 sec it done. While on this sub
jeci, let remark TINT Mr. Van Buren's votes nm
speeches in opposition to universal suffrage wtr
. no, even alluded to Ivy Mr.. Van Ness nor was tn
fact that in The District OF Columbia which is no,
" and has for years been under the exclusive juris
80 diction of loco foco Congress, property quail
. fcation is required
Let us pass to other matters Mr.. Van Mes
-, accused tho Wings of wasting the time of Con
:, gress in eleclioneerng speeches. bun the loco 70
~ cos-the Bentons, Calhouns, Pickens, Duncan!
90 Smiths, Rhet;s Browns, Stranges, virgins, Bu
- channns they have wasted no time in election
=, ccrng speeches, suppose!
lie also accused the wings of voting for apprc
az. a
-, Wigs dared to vote against appropriations an
ihen the Globe, and the whole pack of loco foe
10 eleciionecrers abused the poor Wings for "stoI
i ping the wheels Of government" Really, ii
Wings are badly of, if they can't sui, their oppo
80 nents either way.
-. He accused the Wing presses orthe country
or advocating oppression TO the laborers the pul
=, lie works, such as requiring more than ten hou
h., labor daily. We have not seen solitary VIII
-, paper liable to this charge. Mr.. Van Ness ha
,ho probably swallowed Globuar lie.
=, lie said the Wings of Vermont were league
;,l with British tories against the Canadian Patriots
49,; Nonsense this; aud too ridiculous for sober argr
o. ment But Mr.. Van Buren'S procamaiions? OF
49,, ali why Mr.. Van Buren, could not do
nao wished and there's the neutrality bill, too, sal
l.. Mr.. Van Ness, some parts of which he did III
-, himself approve but Mr.. Van Buren, could II
,,a veto ii he had no right TO re;o deaiis. So sa
oil the Governor; and it was all a very funny seen
M rendered none The less from the fact thar til
.. excuse was hardly cold, before Mr., Van Ness we
H., at Gen. Harrison, hammer and tongs, because
did not veto II bill providing, among other thing
for whipping criminals. OF course, Preside
not -" ~,
his ,'''