New-York daily tribune., 1857-10-06

Mr.. OConor wound up his concluding plea in the
Lennon case by grand perorstOn, of which
cheating, swindling and circumvention were the
burden, as indeed they had served for chorus all
along through bis argument According to his view
OF the case, if the Court of Appeals should refuse
all he asks, it will and can only be because they are
set of cheating, swindng, circumventing rascals,
highwaynen in their disregard of the rights Of
property but pickpockets only in their courage to
appropriate the goods of Others to their own use.
Had they the spirit indeed to come out and totally
repudiate the Constitution of the United States in
the true Garrison fashion, league with the devil
aud covenant with hell, that indeed would very well
satisfy Mr.. OCOnor, perhaps rather better on the
whole than decision in bis favor. But to pretend
to 20 about to find in the Constitution Of the United
States an Interpretation consistent with civilization
and humanity is what Mr.. O'COnor calls cheating,
swindliDg and circumyenton.
Pretty fellows he and bis clients TO undertake to
call other people to account on that score The
cry of stop thief would just as we'll become the
mouth of pickpocket taken in the fact. While
they thus protest against crcumventon, the inier.
probation now attempted to be put upon the Con-
stitution Of the United States by Mr.. O'ConOr and
his clients is itself piece of attempted circumven-
tion which it would not be very easy to match.
The doctrine contended for by Mr.. O'Conor is
substantially this: that the Constitution of the
United States recognizes slaves property, stand
ing on the same basis with other property, and
that by 80 doing the Federal Constitution has put
r A. of {bo C%a>a fa
within their limits 1t is true that in this parcu.
lar case Mr.. O'ConOr goes no further than to con.
tend that Slavery cannot be prohibited as against
citizens of other States temporarily resident here.
But grant him this, and be then has place to
stand upon for future operations. 1t will only
remain to follow out the principle that slaves are
property, and the law abolishing Slavery in the
State of New York must be set aside as unconstitu
tiona just as the Supreme Court of the United
States have undertaken, on the same ground to set
aside the similar prohibition contained in the Mis-
souri, Compromise act.
Admitting such to be the verbal sense of the
Fedeyal Constitution, even Mr. OCOnor himself
can scarcely maintain that the statesmen by whom
that Constitution was drafted, and the States and
people by whom it was ratified had the slightest
idea of the nature of the obligations to which they
were subjectiDg themselves; and now, after lapse
of sixty years and more, during which the rights of
the States in this particular have never been ques.
toned, to turn round and to attempt to hold them
TO Mr.. O'Conor's new construction is what we
should call pretty sharp practice, in fact nothing
better than swinde and crcumvention. Words
are but one form Of expressing ideas; actions are
another and q much more decisive one. In the
DAYS of the trainers of the Constitution, and for
many years after, the advocates Of States Rights,
instead of turning all their attention to other States
and claiming from them and as against them spe-
cial privileges, confined themselves entirely TO
maintaining their own sovereignty at home. They
watched with jealousy the right of legisating for
themselves; they had not yet set up the preense Of
controlling limiting and regulating the legislation of
other States. New-York would have rejected with
dsdan, we are inclined t. think she will still reject
with disdain the idea that it was in the power of
ether States TO make her sayeholding State in
spite of herself and for any Court, State or Fed
,ra, to attempt by dnt of Judicial casuistry to put
her into such a position, would, as We view the
matter, to use the favorte epithets of Mr. O'Conor,
be q cheat q swinde, circumvention
The argument Of Messrs. Evarts and Blunt
presented a remarkable contrast in several
respects to thst Of Mr.. o'COnor. The exi-
oepces of their case were not such as 10 require
them to fly in the face ef the humanity and the
learning Of the times. They did not find it neces.
saiy to substitute in place of that natural law which
mas been recognized as the basis of jurisprudence
ever since jurisprudence existed, the ne x-fangled
doctrines Of Southern newspapers and the logic
ard rhetoric of the slaye-auction block. Mr..
OConor in this business faithfully represented his
clients. His argument from beginning to end
smack ed Of the lash which every now and then he
mapped over the leads Of the Court, as if he stoed
to them not 20 much in the relation Of al advocate
as Of an oyereer who suspected them Of Al intea.