Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1845-02-27
LAW ITEMS.

chusetts. Mr.. Webster was counsel for them, and
made speech of characteristic power treating the
unconstitutonality of the law in his State The ar
gument will be of moment to the friends of Temper
ance throughout the country. The heads of the
gument are thus summed up
LIST. That no State prohibit the sale OF import
ed merchandise in its markets. either by wholesale
retail the retail sale being as indispensable to the
consumption as the wholesale. 3D. That every con-
current other power in State is subject in Its
ercse to this limitation, that, in the event of COLI
sion, the law Of the State must yield to the law of
Congress consttutionaly passed. and cited the cases
Of New York VS.. Miller, ii Pet. lO3; Com. vs.. KIM
ball, "a Pet 365. 3D. That the question IS not what
Massachusetts,, State may do, but what has she
agreed she uM not do! Under this she has ceded to
the United States the Legislative power
on foreign imports, the power to regulate commerce,
&c. 4th. That If Congress has the power to regu-
late subject matter, State cannot interfere. The
General Government, though united, is supreme as to
those objects which il has power, and to sustain
which point was cited the cases of Cohens vs.. Viz
GINA, g w. 3S4; Prigg VS.. Pennsylvania, 10 Pet.
539 5th That is not merely the law on its face,
but the means resored to- which, in their operation,
oppose impede a law of the United States, that
must yield. 9th. That the commerce which Congress
may regulate is something more than traffic. IL Is
every species Of commercial intercourse between the
United States and foreign nations. Quoting Gibbons
and Ogden. o w. lS9, 103 4. It'll That as 10 the
question, What is internal commerce! II must be
none Other than the trading or dealing in articles not
connected with the operation of law of Congress.
1t be completely internal, local, and not con-
nected with the U. S. Government. And, further,
that the power to regulate commerce must not termi-
nate at the boundaries of the State but must enter its
interior. That power is co-extensive with the sub
ect which it acts, for the support of which opin
ion reference had to the of Brown VS.. Mary
land, 446. Sth. That if State can regulate internal
commerce up to her boundaries, she can thereby ex
clude foreign commerce. 9th. That law of Prohi-
bitten being unconstitutional, State empower It's
agents TO do what it cannot do ITSELF viz: prohibit in
ternal commerce in foreign merchandise Supposing
the Legislature Of Massachusetts, to have retained
this power to be exercised by ITSELF would it be right
fu legislation! 10th. That the law of Massachu-
sets is law Of prohibition 1t provides for licenses,
and then empowers its agents to refuse all licenses
and punish all sellers not licensed and, in fact,
license In the sales of foreign wines and liquors
be obtained. 1lth That the State cannot so frame
law, under sort of administration it is consti
tutional and under another not and both operations
be legal But the counsel for the Commonwealth ad-
mis that The Massachusetts law becomes prohbitory,
Whenever In the voice of Commissioners public
timent requires prohibition. 18th. That if this be so
as to Wines &C. it applies to all articles of import
The laws of Congress make distinction, except in
the Of infectious and contagious articles This
means physical not moral consequences from abuse.
18th. That the point where regulation and pro-
hibton begins is the point of collision and of uncon
stitutiona operation of State law 1t therefore be-
comes law of prohibition, when it Furnishes all who
sell without license, and empowers its agents, who
alone can license, not to license at all
INTERESTING CAsEs-U. S. SUPREME CouRr--The
Washington correspondent of the Boston Post wrote
the lst inst that the great of Martin Luther
Borden and Others involving the whole question
of the validity of the Peoples Constitution in Rhode
Island, the docket for trial. and the counsel
here, prepared to argue 1t when shall be reached
1t depends upon the disposition of the intervening
causes whether it will be tried this term. Messrs
Walker, of Mississippi, and Hallett of Boston, are
the counsel for the plaintiff in attendance, and Mr.
Whipple of Rhode Island, for the defendants This
cause will command the profound deliberaton of this
high Court and the people look to the result with the
deepest interest. 1t is, far this Court goes, to
settle or overthrow the whole doctrines of the declar
alton of independence Mr.. Hallett, counsel for
Mr. Dorr, has succeeded in obtaining from the Court
writ of error in his case which will soon be prefer
red and placed on the docket.
The Supreme court of the United States has deci-
ded that the stockholders in the old banks of Maryland
are exempt from the state imposed by the of
1S4l during the continuance Of their charters under
the act of 1921 but that the stockholders in the old
and new banks are liable be taxed by the of Al
or that they claim exemption Under the act
of a. by which their charters further extended
The principle of course applies TO other states.
Another important is the State of Maryland,
for the use Of Washington Co., against the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company. The suit is understood
to be presented by Washington county against the
consent of the State, whose name the County insists
it has right to use, and is to from the de-
PENDANTS million of dollars alleged to be forfeited
to the County under an act of Maryland, passed in
1885, by reason of the Companys not locating their
road through certain parts of the County, by the
act they stipulated to do.
An important decision was made by Judge Mclean,
in the of the United States against Eli s. Pres
oft no udr II of tha
that the embezzlng of public money in the custody
of lawful receiver without any fault negligence
ON his part does not discharge him and his surcties
and that it is good and valid defence an
ton on his official bond
The Illinois Supreme Court, on the 18th inst, de-
cided a very important which taken up on
the part of Joseph, of color, from the ST. Clair
circuit court They decided that all the children born
of French slaves in the State the Ordinance OF
l79S, are free. This will destroy and wipe away
cry thing like slavery in Illinois. The opinion was
delivered by Justice YOUNG and the Bench di-
vided, Seven being In favor of the opinion and two
against it-Messrs Treat and SHIELDS.
JOHN RANDoLPH's WILLs-The question regarding
the validity of John Randolphs WILL or rather wills
so long in dispute and which was left to sworn jury
December last has been decided by jury Thurs
day last settling up the will of 1872 which casts off
most of the relatives from right to his property
and sets free all his slaves The whole case forms
extraordinary drama the theatre of justicethe
esator, one OF the most singular of the age and
his testament of the most and longest contested
which has come before Court of Probate IL
Virginia. The case is now settled Yet, however
an application will be made, we see it stated, by the
opposing counsel for trial, upon the ground o.
mi phpnS fhp arf of of tho in