Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1857-03-13
THE NEW ADMINISTRATIONS.

INSTALLED MARCH 4, 1897.
JAMES BUCHANAN. Of Pennsylvania President
JoHN c. BREoKENRrpeE. Of Kentucky, Iice
President and President Of The Senate.
LEWIS CAss, Of Michigan Secretary If State
HOWELL CoBn. Of Georgia. Secretary Of the Treasury
ions d. Flown, Of Virginia, Secretary Of Var
Isaac ToucaY, Of Connecticut Secretary Of The Nary.
JAoon TuuMrsoN. Of Mississippi, Soc'y Of The Interior
JEREMIAH 5. BLACK, Of Pennsylvania, Ano'ney-Ge
AAnoS " BHowN, Of Tennessee Postmaster General
THE PRESIDENTS INAuGURAL ADDREss--
which will be found in another columns
passionless rciteration of the Cincinnati Plat
form. with little variation in substance The
PresiderA adds his private opinion that
"squattcr sovereignty should be exercised
only when the population of a Territory is
sufficient to form a State and as to the quos-
ton Of government in the period anterior TO
that. and especially the slavery question, he
submits in advance, not to Congress-not to
the Constitution as he evidently intcrprets it
privately, but--to the Supreme Court Of the
United States.
TIE Supreme Court, on the 9th OF March
two days after the inauguration--gave the
opinion which the President anticipated. 1t
is noticed by the Washington Correspondent
of the y. Y. Tribune, as follows;
WAsHINGroN. Friday. March 6.
The whole Slavery agitation was re-opcncd
by the proceedings in the Supreme Court to-
day. and that tribunal voluntarily introduced
itself into the political arena. ChiefJustico
Taneys opinion, representing the majority.
went upon extreme Southern ground, affirm
ing Squatter Sovereignty in the broadcast Dis
union construction, and allowing slaves to be
carried into any Territory. He denied that
"a negro could be a citizen of the United States
in the contemplation of the Constitution, and
hence the Court had no jurisdiction in this
case. He forgot that the Constitution allows .
citizens Of the several States, which is a very
different thing, to bring actions before this
Court. But upon Judge Tanoy's own propo-
siton SCOTS case was concluded here, for,
jurisdiction being denied. the merits could not
be discussed. Yet, in the face of this declar-
alton, he proceeded 10 argue upon the constitu-
tionality of the Missouri Compromise. and
ended by pronouncng it unconstitutional and
void
Judge Nelson evaded the constitutional
question and concurred with the majority
resting his opinion on the late decisions in
Missouri, which were made under party ex-
element, and repudiated the uniform practice
Of the Court for thirty years.
Judge Catron admitted the jurisdiction of
the Court, thus rebuking Judge fancy, but
declared the Compromise void, because it de-
stroyed the obligation Of the third article of
the treaty acquiring Louisiana
Justices Campbell aud Daniel have prepar-
ed opinions. but desire to withhold them until /
Justices Mclean and Curtis have delivered /
theirs, dissenting from the judgment of the
majority, with the view Of rebutting their ar
guments
II had been understood in a consultation of
the Judges that the affirmative opinions should .
be delivered in order first, and then those op-
posing. Hence the minority resist this at
tempted departure from the arrangement, and .
a meeting will be held tomorrow morning to
decide which shall 60 on.
Five Judges, fancy, Campbell, Catron,
Wayne. and Daniel, concur on the constitu-
uona point against the Missouri Compro-
mise. Nelson and Grier dodge by adopting
the Missouri decisions for their justification
in joining the majority. Mclean and Curtis
meet the issue squarely and sustain the iuris-
diction of the Court, with the constitutional
ity of the Compromise.
Much feeling is excited by this decree and
the opinion is freely expressed that a new ell
ement Of sectional strife has been wantonly
imposed upon the country.
This decision viii probably settle nothing,
but rather open anew the discussion Of the
slavery question with redoubled zeal As to
the main point the power of Congress over
the federal territory the decision is sectional:
the five judges from the slave States denying
the power while three from the free States
affirmed it. Judge Nelson of New York did
not touch this question at all. We shall pub
fish the opinions of the Judges, beginning
with the pro-slayery majority opinion, given
by Chief Justice fancy.