Marshall County Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1855-1859, 1856-04-17

that the decision was made for paltry par
ty purposes? For one l repel it as base
falsehood.
These men seem to have no idea of any
high motive or imperative duty resting up
on the Court to protect the Constitution
When the liquor law of 1853 was decided,
they and their congenial defamers raised
the cry that the Court was opposed to tenn
perance and morality. When the school
law was decided. the Court was opposed
to education! Now, when the Fusion H.
quor law is subjected to the same test, the
Court has furnished the ermine to obtain
party success! They cannot endure a
Court that will not sap and destroy the
Constitution ere the ink upon it is yet dry.
1t is remarkable that In all this address
to the people, unc:ions with so much sane
iimonious phraseology. the word COnstitu
! ton never once occurs in connection with
the liquor law of 1855. 1t is never once
in,imated that the law was considered un-
constitutional. There is not word in il
to remind the people of the State that they
have any such instrument to protect their
rights. To read this address one might
suppose that It's authors had not So much
as heard whether there be any Constitu-
ton. AT all events they evidently have no
relish for an instrument which prevents
such
Burning aud shining lights to a the place.
from lording it as they list over the heritage
Of freemen. There is not even the slight
est intimation that the law might possibly
conflict with some constitutional provision
All we learn is that this model enactment
had been arbitrarily declared void by the
Courts TO subserve party ends. The peo-
pie are further informed by these discreet
gentlemen. who are SO scrupulous mot to
use invcctive, that the law would have
been fully sustained if all had been as anx-
ious to do SO, as to find fault therein
Men who thus charge corruption and
perjury { for that is the plain English of H.
on those who are not infected with their
malady-do they presume to appeal TO the
people of Indiana and expect to be believed
when they disclaim political motives and
say they are not anxious for the success cf
any political party? Why, there is not
man in Indianapolis of any party who will
not laugh in their faces when they pretend
such thing. When were they ever any
thing but pariizans-bitter and vindic;ive
at that? Are they not now most Of them.
perhaps all, Aboli.ionists of the most ultra
type, de5asins the temperance cause as
auxiliary and subservient to that? The
very game they played SO successfully in
1854 they are preparing to repeat in 1856.
The Whole tenor Of the address is tha.
what they call 4 good law should be sus-
tanned an, how. a rabid temperance man
said last summer that the law was doing
a great deal Of good and should be sustain
ed even if the Constitution had to be stretch
ed q little. That is true Fusion doctrine;
stretch the Constitution or 'let the Union
slide The hobby of the hour is paramount
to both in the Fusion mind
In conclusion, sir, let me say that the ad-
dress to tho people is a cowardly attack on
men whom judicial propriety renders pow.
erless in defence
The party opposed to ultra Legislation.
and in favor Of all proper legal restriction,
have champions in the field ready to dis.
cuss the merits of the liquor law which
these gentlemen 80 emphat,cally endorse
Why not manfully meet them? Oh. no
these prudent gent emen think it safer to
make dastardly assault on the Judges
whose hands they supposed to be tied.
The truth is, neither party can skulk be-
hind the Supreme Court. a majority of
that Court are not agreed upon anything.
For instance, while | concur with one of
the Judges that tho manufacturing and agen-
cy are unconstitutional, Iexpressly repudi-
ate his reasoning in so many words. AS to
the power of the Legislature to pass fool
ish act, or the province of the Court to cor
rect that folly. we differ IN toto celo. The
whole question of the expediencyo of the law
is open for discussion. and must be met by
politicians on it's merits. 1t is eminently
and obviously proper that such questions
hould be settled by the people. BY their
power over the Assembly. tho Courts. and
even the Constitution itself, tho people are.
ard of right ought to be, the final arbiters
in the liquor question. There is no cvad-
ing it. No true Democrat will seek to
cvadc it. Throughout tho whole North
and North West it has become almost
national issue. BY preconcerted move
ment the Maine law is mounted as hob
by by the same political party from Maine