Herald of the times, and Rhode Islander. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1846-1849, 1848-02-10
Mr.. Webster's Argument.

I PIE tOHSfNufiOH an hHO0c JSiNHd.
/ We present 10 our readers, with great salts
faction, the following exposition by MIR. Web
ster of the Principles on which the American
system of Popular Liberty rests. The report
was made by one of the Editors Of the Courier
e. Enquirer, who happened TO be i'll Washing
ton at the time the case was argued before the
Court and has been submitted to the exam-
nauon and revision of Mr.. Webster himself
1t must be regarded as one of the most instruc-
tive and timely addresses of the great States
man from whom it comes.
4 Mr. Webster said there was something nov
el and extraordinary in the case now before
Court. 1t is not such one as is usually pre-
sented, all will admit, for Judicial consldera-
ton.
I 1t is well known that in the years 1911 and
1912, political agitation existed in Rhode Is
land Some of the citizens undertook to form
a new constitution of government, beginning
their proceedings towards that end by meetings
of the people, held without authority of law,
and conducting those proceedings through such
forms as led them in 1912 To say they had es-
tablished constitution and form Of govern
| -
isting government of Rhode Island treated
these proceedings as nugatory, so far as they
went 10 establish a new constitution, and as
criminal so far as they proposed 10 confer au-
thority upon any persons TO interfere with the
acts of the existing government.
Il All will remember that the state of things
approached, ifnOt actual conflict between men
in arms, at least the perlous edge OF battle.
Arms were resorted To, force was used and
greater force threatened.
/ In June lSi2 this agitation subsided. The
new government, as It called itself, disappear
ed from the scene of action. The former Gov
eminent, the Charter Government, as II was
sometimes STYLED, resumed undsputed control,
went on in lis ordinary course and the peace
of the State was restored.
/ But the past has been too serious to be forgot
ten. The Legislature of the State had, at an
early stage of the troubles, found it necessary
to pass special laws for the punishment of the
persons concerned in these proceedings Ii de-
| fined the crime of treason, as well as smaller
! offences, and declared martial Jaw. Gov. King
proclaimed the existence of treason and rebel
/ lion in the State, and declared the State under
martial law.
| This having been done and the ephemeral
government of Mr.. Dor having disappeared,
the Grand Jures of the State found indictments
against several persons for having disturbed the
peace of the State. and one against Dorr, for
treason. The indictment against Dorr came
on in the Supreme Court of Rhode Island IN
1874, before a tribunal admitted on all hands to
be the legal judicature of the State. lie was
tried by jury of Rhode Island, above all OBJ
lection, and after all challenge. BY that jury,
under the instructions of the Court, hc was
convicted of treason and sentenced to lmprlsOn-
ment for life
Now an action is brought III Courts ofthc,
L. ;. and before your honors by appeal, IN.
which it is attempted TO prove that The charac-
ters of this drama have been oddly and wrong
" cast, that there has been great mistake
in the Courts of Rhode Island They say that
Mr.. Dorr, instead OF being traitor or an III
surrec,ionist, was the real Governor of the
State at that time that the force used by hlm
was exercised in defence of the constitution and
laws and not against them; that he who oppos-
the constituted authorities was not Mr. Dorr,
but Gov. King; and that it was he who should
have been indicted and tried. This is rather
an important mistake, TO be sure, iiit be one.
Change places says poor Lear, and, hamdy-
daady. which is the Justice, and which the
thief So do our learned opponents say to
us change places, and, hdndy-ddndy, which
is the Governor and which the rebel! 4
The aspect of the case therefore, is, as |
have said, novel. 1t may perhaps give ylyacl-
" and variety to judicial inyes 4auon. 1t may
relieve the drudgcrv OF pcrusing urrfs, demur-
rers and pleas in bar, bills in equity and an
swcrs, and introduce topics which give sprght-
hncss and freshness and novelty TO courts of
law.
However impossible it may be, and sup
pose il to be chOHy impossible, that you should
take judicial cognzancc of the questions which
the plaintiff has presented In the Court below,
yet do not think II matter OF regret that the
cause has come hlther. Ii is SAID, and truly
said, that the case involves the consideration
and discussion of what are the true principles
of government IN our American System of pub
lie Liberty This is very right. The ease
does involve these questions, and harm can
never come from their discussion, especially
when such discussion is addressed TO reason
and not to passion, when IT is had before mag
istrates and lawyers, and not before excited
masses out of doors. ] agree entirely that the
case does raise considerations, somewhat en-
tenslve, of the true character of our American
System of popular liberty and although am
constrained to differ from the learned counsel
who opened the case for the plaintiff IN error,
on the principles and character Of that Amer-
can Liberty,-upon the characteristics of that
American System on which changes of the
Government and the Constitution, If they be-
come necessary, are to be made, yet agree
with him that this case does present them for
consideration.
Now there are certain principles of public
liberty which, though they do not exist IN all
forms of government, exist nevertheless 10
some extent IN different forms of government.
The protection of life aud property, the hdteos
corpus, trial by Jury, the right OF open trial.
these are principles of public liberty existing
m their best form III the republican institutions
of this Country, hut, 10 the extent mentioned,
existing IN the Constitution of England. Our
American Liberty, allow me to say, therefore
has an ancestry, a pedigree, history. Our
ancestors brought To this Continent all that was
valuable, IN their Judgement, IN the political IN
slitutions of England, and left behind them all
that was without value or that was obicciiona-
BILE. Daring the colonial period our ancestors
were closely connected with the colonial sys-
tenn but they were Engllshmen as well as
coonsls, and took an interest IN whatever con-
cerncd the mother country, especially IN al
great questions of public liberty in that coun-
luy. Therefore hey took an intoros, IN The