The voice of freedom. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1839-1848, 1844-01-18
TweNty.Eighth Congress.
From the Emancipator g. Free Aineric

Speech OF Mr.. ADAMS, on the Refer
ence Of the Resolves of the Legislature O.
Massachusetts, in favor OF amending the
Federal Constitution. --ConcLuded.
Friday, December 20, 1843.
But gentlemen have commended that this
Is unconstitutional. Ga this point |
would ask OF my friend from S. Carolina
near me, (Mr. HOLINESS whether he re-
collects declson of Judge William John
son in the case of certain citizen oil
Rhode Island, who was imprisoned,
bound, and know not but scourged, in
the State Of South Caroline, for the crime
of-having dark complexion.
MIR. HOLMES SAID, | remember that
case, and [ never ceased TO honor the
name of William Johnson; bat on a sub
sequent occasion J. NJ. Berrien, then Al
lorney General of the United States, but
now representative liz the Senate, gave
it as his opinion that the law was in con-
formity with the Constitution, and the
Government sanctioned that opinion
That law for imprisoning persons of COL
or who came into the State OF South
Carolina, by the blessing of God, is still
in existence, as the law of the land, and
will be put in force against any who may
enter the State for incendary purposes.
Mr.. ADAMS. Yes; and so it appears,
after a decision by Judge of the Su,
preme Court Of the United States-hini-
self too, native OF South Carolina, that
a law was so utterl y unconstitutional that
it would not hear an argument, six or
seven wears after an Attorney General OF
the United States gives an opinion that it
is cons itulional, and ergo the law is valid !!
Thus it stands at this hour. Sir, is the
opinion of an Attorney Genera of the u F..
States, the law OF this land? | have al
ways understood that the official opinion
of a Judge Of the Supreme Court of the
United States, unapPealed from, is the
law of the land and believe, as much
as | believe the sun will rise tomorrow,
that the decision of Judge Johnson, in ref.
erence to that law of South Carolina, is
at this day the law Of this land, aud that
this State law is SO unconstitutional that it
will not bear an argument.
But will inquire Of my friend from
South Carolina whether he reco!lects an
other instance? The same Judge, ma.
tive of South Carolina, when pronouncing
his opinion on that law, alluded TO the
opinion expressed by my honorable friend
himself that if the conforcement OF that
law would produce a dissolution of the
Union, South Carolina ought to adhere to
it. Was it 500
Mr., HOLMES said he perfectly rememb-
cred having said, aud he would add that
he never had seen reason to change the
opinion, that if that law of South Carroll.
ma was to be repealed, and the South
must submit to an influx of that sort of
persons which that law kept out, he had
thought then, and he thought nowS and
would say i: with all the soIemnity eX'
pressed by the gentleman from Massachu-
setts in the presence of his Maker, that
the quicker the Union was dissolved
peaceably, and Southern interests, South
ern rights, and Southern property could
be respected and maintained the better
He remembered it we'll, and never had
seen reason to regret having made tina
declaration. A. NJ" !A.SAMs Tesumeu.