New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-05-20

| exclude the Catholic worship from her limits
In the case of the negroes, however, the Chief
Justice attempts to clnch his argument by refer
ring to the reenactment in Massachusetts,, so late
as 1876, Of the prohibition Of marriages, which
| also, by the new act, were made absolutely vod
| and not only was this provision included in the
| Massachusetts, codifcation of 1885, but by that
code the penalty against such persons as might pre-
| sumo to celebrate such marriages was increased
| by adding Imprisonment 10 fne The Chief JUS
tice fourishes this specimen of Massachusetts, legs
lation in our faces with great air Of triumph, as
though it were quite decisive Of the case; yet to
| put a complete veto on the conclusions which he
seeks to draw from it, it is only necessary to refer
| to previous part of his own argument.
At the very commencement, be sets out with put
| ting the negroes in category by themselves. He
| draws black lines around them and marks them off,
or seeks 10 mark them of, from all the rest
of creation. In particular he draws dstinc-
ton between them and the Indians, as to which
latter people he expressly admits that there
il not and never was anything in our
Constitutions, laws or ideas to prevent them,
(tbe Indians) from becoming citizens Of the
United States. Now, our fox of ChiefJus-
tice, caught this time in his own trap, will please
TO take notice that the Massachusetts Act of 1856
and Code of 1896 put Indians on the same level
with negroes and muattoes, and equally prohibits
intermarriages with them. But Indians, as the
ChiefJustice has gone out of his way to assure
US, may unquestonably be citizens of the United
States; whence, of course, any argument against
the possibility Of the citizenship of negroes founded
on the prohibition Of intermarriage falls to the
ground If such laws prove nothing against the
possibility of Indian citizenship of course they can
prove nothing against the possibility of negro cti
zenship. These laws, in fact, and their long re-
tention in the Massachusetts statute book (frOm
which, however, they have for some time been
erased) in fact had their origin, not in civic, but in
religious prejudices The pous founders Of New
England had taken it into their heads that, as God
had made man of distinct races, He intended
they always should continue so. To be
sure there was, perhaps just as much
room for the argument that as God had made
these diverse races capable of mixing, he intended
they should mix; but pious New-England did not
see the matter in that light; the contrary, such
intermarriages were regarded As somewhat of tho
nature Of incest. So strong was this religious
prejudice against the mixture of races, that the
good people of Connecticut whose crusade against
Miss Prudence Crandall and her school for the edu
cation of colored females is duly cited and cele-
brated by ChiefJustice Taney-who finds great
comfort in bis brother Daggetts opinion delivered in
that case, though he forgets either to notice or to
initiate the prudence Of the Connecticut Court of
Appeals, which, managing to get rid of the matter
IN side issue, was careful not to NEEDLE with the
constitutional points raised by Judge Daggett-so
strong, We say, and even viruent, were these
prejudices of race in Connecticut that when about
the same time, some pious Connecticut young lady
chose to marry converted Indian or South Sea
Islander, Zone Of the pupils at the mission school
established in that State), a terrible hullabaloo
was raised about it, especially in the religious
world, as though in thus interrarrying these
parties had committed some terrible offense
great deal worse than if they had run away
with the husband and wife of somebody else.
1t is very true, doubtless, that both in Mas.
sachusets and Connecticut strong feeling of caste
has prevailed, and still prevails; but it would be
this very decision shows--to conclude from that,
that in the opinion of Massachusetts, and Connect
cut negroes have rights, and are only fit TO be
reduced to Slavery and governed as subjects, with
absolute and despotc power"
Having disposed of Massachusetts, and Connect |
cut the Chief Justice passes to New Hamp- |
shire; but the only thing he can find there to help
him is a law of that State contained in the codif-
cation of 1915 and also of 1855 which, in reference
to the persons to be enrolled in the militia, speaks
only Of free white citizens" Hereupon our foxy |
ChiefJustice INDUCES in sundry fourshes about |
the inestimable right of bearing arms and the pal
pable evidence which the New Hampshire legis- |
latOrs Of 1915 and 1855 had exhibited of their I'M
alterable opinion that negroes have no rights which
white men are bound to respect, but on the con- |
trary, have 'by common consent been excluded |
"from all civilized governments and the family of
nations, and doomed to Slavery" while all the |
time he knows perfectly well that the reason of |
this limitation was and is, that Congress, which |
has the exclusive right to provide for organizing
the militia, has limited the enrolment to white
citizens.
Let our readers carefully these two /
specimens of judicial and historical reasoning.
When they have picked all the meat out of these
two remarkable nuts we shall have some others /
for them to crack.
A spirited discussion has lately sprung up in GER
tain journals with regard To the Justice and policy