Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-11-12

tonul % vo,s 10 pay Msm Let me tell all who may need
the information that there is nothing in the constitution
which prohibits the Legislature from paying
ona debt To contract debt is one thing, to pay il
another 1t may be unconstitutional to do the and
not the other. A friend may sign my name to note
without authority, aud yet If pay II am not guilty OF
any wrong The Legislature has full power the pub
lie treasury. III any other answer were needed to so
frivolous objection it could be found in the fact that
these bonds not unconstitutional whatever you and
and others may have thought The High Court of Err
rors and Appeals having the ampest authority do So
has forever settled that question The difference between
the opinion of citizen that these bonds unconstitu-
onal and the judgment of the court that they
stuonal is just the difference between the opinion Of
the unsuccessful litgant who thinks he does not
debt for the whole amount of which the court has just
rendered judgment against him, and that judgment
You may think my dear sir, that have travelled
great deal Of ground without coming to the principal
topic 1.-THE letter. to which you have called my attention
but if you have carefully noted what have already said
you will perceive that have but little yet do Before
proceed to state and the positions of that letter.
will be important to notice certain valuable admissions
made in it.
l. The letter states that tie Legislature has no authority
rpuqte these bonds and that the State has therefore
virtually repudated only failed to pay This is
important because it is so frequently stated that the
people have decided in favor of reputation that many
persons in and out Of the State consider there has been
direct vote upon the point by the people which not
The fact The Legislature has declared the bonds void
but the letter referred says that this decision of the
Legislature is not only not la but is absolute " null
w, III.
follows that its in the EXPRESSED
But the courts, who do not usurp judicial pow
Ell and which have authority to pronounce decrees have
declared the bonds constitutional and valid This they
had right do. The State itself invoked their des-
son and without dishonor refuse to abide by it
unless the letter says, she render to the corid
sufficient for not doing so Of the sucency of the
excuse offered by the letter shall presently
2 The letter pronounces the heretofore given
by the Legislature for repudatng and which alone
hitherto the party have predicated their action
IN ho fyusn Mint and yhIn fha nnrfc
would pronounce utterly antenab' If this letter have
any weight with you it should make you discard all the
views heretofore held and advocated by those who have
considered the bonds unconstitutional
The letter looks upon the attempt to elect repudiatng
Judges to the decision already rendered
which should meet the emphatic and decisive rebuke
of the people. The writer's remarks worthy of being
quoted The people, Che says) sure, will rebuke
the attempt whatsoever it is made manner at once
\ emphatic and decisive If in this country the Judge
shall sink to be the supple instrument Of the ap
pointing power If the idea is innugurated that
she public will, and not the canons OF right, are to
glide the deliberations of the BENCH then farewell for
ever to constitutional liberty Instead Of the respecta
bic and upright magistrates that SO far have graced
your courts, expect to Tressilian Billing
Scroggs Fleming seated your bench Upon
this subject misread the lessons of history
Through the Of full centuries
the stream Of time continually murmurs, beware Of
judiciary that is directly dependant upon the will of the
appointing power These sentiments do honor to
their author; and only surprised that they to
are forced SO totally to dissent.
A. There but three ways to settle this question,
says the writer of the letter /. By payment which he
conceyes hardly probable but does not whether he
would favor not 2 By the arbrament of disinte-
rested person g. By the calling of convention and
pudation by the people for valid reason.
have two remarks the proposition to call conven
ton express the views Of the people this subject
First, should, without admitting any autho rity in the
people thus assembled to themselves and the
body polite from the judicial obligation resting on
ha mead tbs of toru
payment of these bonds stripped of every thing Of
party character, submitted directly to the people. be-
eYe the people have but to understand the subject to
pronounce and decidedly in favor of the payment
of the bonds we have known Of convention called for
an object that, if accomplished would have been dsas
trous in the extreme the subject discussed, the
people understood It. and the projectors of the conven
ton were overwhelmed with discontinue and defeat.
believe convention convoked to repudiate would as
semble to pay.
Secondly, admit the position assumed tina
convention of the people of Mississippi is omnpo
= tent the British Parliament deny that it annu
the DEGREES Of courts reverse or set them aside
utterly deny its power to out the records Of tn
Q past" convention is not omnpotent there Ger
tain bounds which it may not pass; certain principle
which il cannot overthrow. Those who speak thus o
conventions forget that Mississippi is but limited
Constitution of the United States is the supreme law
the State of Mississippi, paramount to the constitution
and laws Of the State and that convention can by
any act pass any Decree establish any ect pro-
claim any constitution which is at with the proyi
sons of the Constitution of the United States Suppose
for example, that convention called and to
undertake to annu the DEGREES Of the courts the act of
the convention would be bruua fglnsn for the
Constitution of the United States declares that Sta te
shall pass any law imparng the obligation of contracts
No will deny that judgment is contract, and one
which has been already decided by the Supreme Court
Of the United States in the of MdSseagW VI. Doras
beyond the power Of the State to interfere with modify
any way. Does Mississippi when she resolves herself
into convention to remodel her constitution ascertain
the popular will and express it any topic, TO bt
State does the authoritative of the convention
having such omnipotent power is Claimed for it. be
come any thing more or less than lar passed By h
State" And if not-if it be but law of the most so
Tenn Sort and Of the highest sanction that be passed
by the State then the convention cannot annu decree
them. 1t is expressly prohibited from exercising
any such right 1t is utterly beyond its power to
tie records Of The past, and all those mighty powers
claimed for the convention are, after all, but "
flourish Of humpts." have space time TO press
this argument further but it to me that every
intelligent man will recognise in it complete REPUTATION
of the idea that the convention by any in the
slightest degree impair the obligation which these bond
holders hold against the State If it otherwise the
convention which would repudiate the bonds could
but complete its gnominy by declaring that the debts due
by her citizens should to be obligatory and thus
put her own people upon par with herself.
But admitting the convention called and admitting its
power TO repudiae, provided sufficient reason" for
letter. her glory must "su6er eclipse from de d1mnfng
Jg Of public dishonesty" let what is this con-
vincng and sufficient which is to rescue the State
from this dread alternative 1t is predicated on two as
symptoms neither Of which is 1t attempted by argument
to maintain, and both of which unsound propositions.
These two propositions are, That without an express
warrant in the constitution STATE has no porsr 10 create