New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-06-05

We should Ike to be informed under what gu
thority and upon what grounds the official reporter
of the decisions OF the Supreme Court of the United
States entities the opinion delivered by Chief JUS
tice fancy III the bred Scott case The opinion of
the Court" Mr.. Chief Justice fancy delivered
the indgmeat of the Court as cOncurrtd in by six
Judges. which was that the case be sent back to
the Court below to be dismissed for want of Jurs-
diction, but the opinion which he delivered on that
occasion vas not as 10 ,Ine Of its most remariSa
bic points, the opinion OF the Court but only the
opinion Of Mr.. Chief Justice fancy and Of minor
lty of the Judges, and, thsrefore, under any point
of view, totally destitute of binding authority. 1t
is due 70 the credit of the Court, which has no rep
utation 10 spare that it should be relieved from the
damaging burden of the ignorance and mIarepre-
sentations of fancy, Wayne and Daniel, sadded
uron it BY this assumption that the scandalcus per-
versions of history ani the false reasoning based
UPON those scandalous perversons emanatP'l from
the majority Of the Court, when, in fact, they are
Endorsed by nobody except fancy, Wayne and
Daniel.
Misled by the idea that Taneys opinion WAS the
opinion Of the Court, it has been supposed that
the point authoritatiyely decided in this case, and
the only point so decided, was, that negroes of
African descent cannot be- citizens Of the United
States: whereas, in point Of fact that idea was
sustained by only three Judges against twO-fOur
being entirely silent upon it, II is true that these
three Judges attempt to back themselves up by
vmching in the opinions of Attorney Generals
Writ and Gushing, and Judge Daggets of Con-
necticut; bat, as neither of these three happens
to be Judge of the Supreme Court of the United
| States. they are still but minority, and their
| OPINION totally destitute of any authority as de-
ci.ion of the Court, and depending solely for its
weight with the profession on the correctness OF
| the facts that il assumes, and, admitting those
fats, the justice of the deductions attempted to
| be drawn from them.
We have already shown in repeated articles that
the assumption Of these three Judges that in Colo
Nal times and at the period Of the adoption Of the
Constitution, negroes were considered incapable of
possessing and enjoying any social and political
rigbts as fit only to be slaves, and totally unfit,
under any and all circumstances, to be citizens, is
absolutely and most garngly aud atrOcously Ease,
| 10 such extent, in fact, that at the time Of the
adoption of the Constitution free negroes and eman
cpated slaves did possess the right Of suffrage on
the same terms with the whites in every one of the
original thirteen States, except South Carolina and
possibly Delaware. But not only are these three
Judges thus detected in gross falsfcstiOn-for it
is impossible to presume that they could have been
merely ienorant-we have also shown that, as is
very apt to happen in such cases. this falsiicatOn
was to no purpose, as these false representations
would not have helped them even had they been true.
BY calling attention to the state of public feeling in
the colonies and States down even to the time Of the