The Mississippi Creole. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1841-1851, 1841-08-14

nal Her case 10 10 be heard and decided
upon tho same rules and principles Of law
applicable to the case Of an individual or
private person. Suppose, then, that a
suit is commenced as$.insta mere private
person. and the plaintiff relies upon an
act Of the Legislature TO nainialn ms
case, which act the defendant aHeges 20
he unconstitutional how will the court
determine the question: L will alone
look 70 the context, terms and subject
matter OF the 1aw--the face OF the act,
in deciding upon It's constitutionaity. II
will not permit the defendant to go be-
yond HE face Of the act. Then, II the
State i,r suhiecting herself TO be sued in
the ordinary courts of the country, has
placed herself. when sued. in the attitude
Of a private person, so far as that suit Is
concerned, Of course, she is bound By
the same rules oflaw and evidence which
would relate to the suit Of "a private IN.
dtvidnal. Now, the Chartered the Bank
ot..act Of incorporation, having been
passed by second Legislature, and hav-
ing received approval aud constitution
alesanction ofthe Executive, must ia law
be presumed, in allrespects, constitution
oil. The argument is susceptible of ma
nv familiar illustrations. The Constitu-
ton requires that, every bill shall be read
and passed three several times, in each
branch OF. the Legislature, be signed by
the Speaker, &C., and receive the approval
of the Governor, before it shall become
a Law. Now, the mere fact that the bill!
was read and passed three several times
in each House, is &C necessary part of
the act, and never appears upon its face;
and the judiciary must presume and take
il for granted, that all the acquisitions Of
the Constitution have ceen complied with,
otherwise the Speaker Of the House, the
President of the Senate would mover have
signed, and the Governor approvedit. Ev-
cry law or act read from the statute book,
it my position be correct, would have to
be proved. Another section Of the Con-
declares that "all bills for rails
ing revenue shall originate in the House
Of Representatives. Now, the fact that
such bill originated in the House, con
stitutes no part of the bill, and yet that
fact must be presumed to give effect
And why? Simply because those who
passed, signed and approved it were the
sworn officers of the people, and we must
not presume that they violate their duty.
Other striking illustrations, drawn from
the Constitution, might be adduced, in
support ofthis position. But contend far
Their that, the State is estopped from de-
nying the fact of publication. | have
shown that, the members oftheLegislature
and the Executive were the only persons
who were to betatisfed that the act was
duly published. They are the only pro-
perly constituted judges, appointed and
chosen by the people themselves, Of the
fact of publication. They by passing the
act, and the Governor by approving it.
have declared to the world that, there
was no constitutional barrier or impedi-
meht to the passage and approval Of the
act,-that the acquisitions of the funda-
mental law had, in all things, been com
piled with, and therefore, the act is con.
stitutional repeat that, the Consttu
ton makes them the sole judges of the
fact of publication, and this is not mere
assertion. In Peters Reports, in the
case Of Ross VS.. Barlaud, ct ais, page
666, the court decides this principle
Commissioners were appointed under the
act, relative to claims of lands Of the Uni
ted States, south Of the State of Tennes
see, and were authorized to hear. evi
dence as to the time Of the actual evacu
alton Of the territory by the Spanish
troops, and to decide upon the facts. The
law gave them the power to hear ant
decide all matters respecting such claims
and to decide thereon, accordin 10 justic,
and equity. The court decided that the
we're bound to presume that every fac
necessary to wSrrant the certificate, Il
the terms Of twas proved before the com
rnissioners, and that consequently, 1t va
sboOn to them, that the final eUacution o
the Spanish troops took place ON The BOZ
Of March, 1898. Now, apply this prin
ciple to the case in hand. The Consti
tuition authorized the Legislature to pas
the act in question, under forms and re
questions. ALI those forms and reouisi
tons actually appear to have been com
piled with, but The fact of publication
The members of the legislature, VIII
alone had the right to pass the act, AM
the Executive, to approve it, upon tn
knowledge or evidence of the publication
are necessarily the only judges of tn
fact, or of the kind and character Of tn
evidence requisiteto establish it. Their
if they were the constitutional Judges @
the fact, or the measure and degree c
evidence requisite to prove that fact, the
we are bound TO presume every fact ne
cessary to warrant the passage and an
prevail Of the act. Then, in not the Stat
estopPed and forever barred from enqur
ing into the fact of publication? VIVA
IS the true statement of the States de
fcncel Let US suppose that suit has beel