The State guard., 1848-08-15
Amoal.er cl.argc rcfntedl

punishment of yagrants, cJc.-commonly called the whipping law" As they are called for from different quarters, we think it advisable to give them general crcula- ton
 Mir. FELcu desired to say few words in reference to the law referred to in this debat,. Neither the senator from Dela- ware nor the senator from Mississippi ap- pears to understand the Territorial organi- zaton in Michigan when this law was adopted.
 The power of legislation was commit ted to the goverhor, the presiding judge, and two associate judges of the Territory. l These four individuals, acting together, possessed the only legislative authority which was exercised within the limits of the Territory. They acted together as a board ; each having his vote upon the adoption of proposed laws, and under an express provision that a majority should govern. Gen. Cass, who was governor of the Territory, had no veto over the ac- ton of the other members; he was on an equality only with them, and had his sim pie vote. He may have been opposed to the law in question, and have given his vote against its adoption yet, by the votes of the other three, it would become a law, and it would be his duty to certify it in the proper manner to give it effect. From the evidence here presented, it ap- pears to have been adopted by majority of the governor and judges; but having no record of the action of that tribunal upon it, we have no evidence 10 show whether Gen. Cass was in favor of 1t or against it. All that now appears is per fectly consistent with the truth, even if Gen. Cass strenuously opposed and voted against the adoption of the law. But whether ii met his approval or his opposi- tion, is, to my mind, a matter of little i'm poTtance.
 | The law-making powers of the govern- or and judges were peculiar. They had NO general authority of legislating for the Territory. Their power was limited to the adopting of such laws of the States, criminal and civil, as might be necessary and best suited to the circumstances of the district. They could adopt the laws of other States, but could originate none.- Since the charge has been made in the public papers against Gen. Cass, that he approved the law referred to by the. sena- tor from Delaware, friend of mine has examined the original in the office of the Secretary of State, and informed me thm it certified upon the manuscript, that the same is adopted from the laws of the State of Vermont. From this iniorma- ton, assert with confidence that such is the fact. In regard on the character of the laws adopted under the organization aforementioned of the Territories of the northwest, two things deserve considera- ton. The first is, that the laws were uni formly adopted from the statutes of the oldest and most enlightened States in the Unior-from those in which the subjects of good government were most perfectly understood, and the principle of morality most fully established. Hence the State of Vermont, a State which is admitted to be inferior to none in these important re-. spects, is one from which such laws were derived and transferred to the new country in the west. The senator from Florida
 
 consideration existed in Massachusetts :; and the statute books of most of the old thirteen States would, believe. if exam ined, show similar provisions enacted and enforced at an early period. It is also to be remarked, in the second place, that the laws adopted under the early organiza- ton in the different Territories of the northwest. are similar in their character. Many of them are identical in terms and laws making penal the offences described in the enactment under consideration, and inf;cting punishment of the same charac- ter, will be found among the early laws of most if not all the Territories; and in some portions of the west they were long continued under the State organizations In the State of Indiana law similar of it's provisions to that under consideration, was for many years on the tatute-boot, and in force. This law, at the1time of its passage, received the official approval of Gen. Harrison, then governor of the 1 Territory of Indiana, and since President of the United States. That law, however, was more severe in its penalties than the law adopted in Michigan. While the punishment in the latter was limited to ten strips, and to term of labor not exceeding three months, the Indiana law, extended the penalty to forty stripes save one, and the term of service at hard labor to nine months. The law-malSing power of Indi- ana at this time resided in council and house of representatives. Gen. Harri- son, as governor of the Territory, had, under the ordinance of l7S7, an absolute veto upon every bill. Without his appro. val, no law could be valid to the enact ment aforementioned, he gave his appro- val in writing, Gen. Cass, as governor of Michigan, l have already shown, had no such controlling power over the action of the board of which he was member.- The law of which the gentleman com plains was adopted in 1913, thirty years ago. Sir, do not all know that within that space of time, crimes and punishments therefore have been the subject of care- ful investigation, and that the result has been a great change in public opinion, and the laws in regard to them Methods of nIinishnent annroyed hv all at that tin,o