Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1857-03-19

WAsHiSsroS, Ma-.h 6.-The decision
of tas Supreme CoaTt in the Dire Scott
cas-, was dc e-larsl to-day BY Chief Justice
Taacy. II was fall anl elaborate state
mc1t OF tn, views OF tn, coart- They have
&c :la-cl al ths important points. q. ~
1st That ,g-ocs. whether Slaves or not.
ar,n,t citizens or the United States by the
Constitution.
2I TINT the oriinanec of 17sT hal no
in lspsn lsat Constitutional fore or leg n ef-
feet, sa5se lueatiy TO the adoption Of the
Co istitution, and could not oPcras. its
self to Confer freedom or citizenship within
citizens by the Constitution.
81 That tn. provision OF the at OF
1920, commonly callel ths Missouri Com
promise. so ia a, il un lcstook to seclndc
n.y o slarc-y from AMI communicase free
dom anl ci:izsnshp TO ngro,s in tn,
northern part Of Loai INA cession, was
hyislasivs at cxcesliay thu powers OF
Cong-ess, AMI voil. OF no legil: effect to
that easl., In sdc,iling those main points
tn. SupreE, Court determined the follow
iag incidental points: 1st. The express
ioa. the Territory. anl Other property.-
Ua;oa,- in the Constitution, applies IN
terms only. to such Territory as the Union
p5ss. sscl AZ IA, time Of tn, adoption Of
ia. Constitution. II. Tn, rights of citl-
zsas OF ths Initial States emigEating to any
fslcral tsrritoEy. all tn, power OF the Eel
c-al Goyernm, ,ns thus dcpcaiing on the gen
ersi provisions OF th, Constitution which
dcine in this, as in all o.lsr respeets, the
po~s.s of Coagrcs. 81 As Coasrcs does
not possess power in itself to make enact
msats rs.a.ive to p,-soaS, or prepsrsy of
ci.izcas In tac Unite States in the fc iefal
territory. other than such as the Constitr-
tio1 coafers, SO it caano. co1stituiionally
dclesst, any such powers to the Territorial
Gove-nn,at ory,nizsl By. it unler the
Co1stitutioa- 4th- Ths legal condition
Of slave in the State of Missouri is not
sE.tsi by temporary so;ourn OF such
slave in any other State but on his rutuin
his con alitioa still depen Is on the laws OF
the State of Missouri. anil as the plaintiff
was not a citizen Of the State of Missouri,
aalthercfore coald no. sue in the Courts OF
tn, United States. the suit must be dis
misse I for want of jurisdiction.
The delivery Of this opinion occupied
about three hours. 1t was listened to
with profo1nl attention by crowded court
room Among the aulitors were miny
g,ltlem,n of cminen. legal ability AMI a
du, proportion of ladies'. ~
Th, Jastics statel as to the merits of
tn. cas-. tn, question being whether or not
tn, removs. of Scott from Mississippil
with his master to Illinois, with view of
temporary residence wo.kelshis emancipa-
tioa- He maintained that tho question de-
pen lei solely on tn, law Of Missouri. anil
fos tha. reason the judgement of the Court
below sholl1 be aifrmeI. W
Justice Catron believed tn. Supreme
Co1rt has jurisdiction to decide on. the
m,rits ofthe case. Congress could nos do
dircctly whit it can not do inlircctly, IL it
could ex>luic onc species Of property
it could another, with reglrd to the terri-
tories ccl,l. Congress could govern
them only with "a RESTRICTIONS of the
Ssa.ss which &C le them. an thu Missouri
act Of 1929 violate! the lcaling features of
;hs Constitution. twas. thsrefore, void
Hs coa.ludel with his brother Judges. that
Scott is slave, AMI was 50 when the suit
was brought Several other judges are to
dcclare their vciiys tomorrow.