The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1859-09-08

that way until the people choose to change
il by altering the words, otherwise a written
constitution will be made 10 read this thing
one year. aud another thing another year.
Il was settled then in 1903, in 1905, IN
1922 in the great Missouri restriction, by the
Judgment solemnly given of an entire CABIN
ct, one of the profoundest lawyers we have
known in the country, being Attorney Gen
erai.
MICHIGAN AND WISCONSIN.
But what else did you do about its l tell
you you did right on the same thing to the
year 1850 Ia the year 1886 Wisconsin
came as Territory you organized her
Michigan came as a Territory, and you or
ganized her, and you provided in that organic
law, that while the Legislature might make
laws and send them to you, if Congress dis
approved of those laws, they should be null
and void. President Jackson signed bills of
this kind. Did not ..OId Hickory know a
thing or two about this matter? President;
Adams signed such bill; both the Adamses
signed such bills, Madison signed bills like
it. All of those bills involving that question
and all deciding them one way. and even in
1850, in that compromise. as i, was called, it
is enacted tina. New Mexico and Utah shall
send their laws TO Congress, and if Congress
disapproved of them, they should be null and
void.
Now, my brother Democrat, what becomes
Of vcur "Squatter Soyereiguty!" Do you
know more than all those men? Are you
egotistic enough to believe that you under
stand the words OF the Constitution better
than all the statesmen, public men. lawyers
and private men that have lived before You
for seventy years? HIVE you that confidence
in yourself? If you have, God have mercy
upon Jon. You are past praying. aud am
done. Laughter.
PoLK's DOCTRINE.
Dsn't you know we acquired the Territo
ry of Oregon under Polk's administration,
and put the Wlmot proviso on it? DID not
Polk know As much about it as Mr.. Doug
las, Did not Jackson know as much a5olt
this thing as Stephen A. Douglss2 Dii not
Mr.. Monroe and his Cabinet? s. far about
the legislative power on this question.
THE SUPREME COURTS DECISION.
The question came up from Florida in
perhaps 1924 or 1926, in the case of Cintcr
against an Insurance Company. You will
find the case in Howard's Reports. John
Marshal was Cnief Justice OF the United
States then. Mr.. Story was on the bench !;
a man whose law books on the subject Of our
laws, aud on the subject Of law ani chance
ry in general, have been read with the high
est com nendat on of any man that has ever
written law books during the last century, in
the Court of the Kings Bench in Wesmin-
steI Hall. John Marshall was on the bench,
and the man that does not know something
Of him ought not to be allowed to vote. The
very question was brought into court as TO
whether law being ma ie by Territory
was valid or not. The court said it was not;
that there was no power under heaven to
make laws in a Territory but Congress.
Now, my brother Democrat, what was the
reasoning of Chief justice Marshall? He
was no fool; but if there was an intellect ev-
er vouchssted by God to man that was com
petent to unravel the sophistres of men, it
was John Marshall TO whom it was given.-
Why. he said, How is this; how can this be?
Congress has the power to ac4u re territory
by treaty, and who will the territory be con
veyed to? To the Territory? No! To the
Safe? So? To the United States the ces
sion is made. Spain conveys New Mexico
and California to the United States. What
follow? Ii there is law TO be made for
that Territory that was yesterday foreign
Territory, it is BY The legislative department.
of the Government TO whom the Territory is
conveyed WHAT is the legislative depart
ment of the Government of the United
States? Congress. That was his reasoning.
1t was very simple. very plain, and utterly
and hopeleSsly conclusive sainst those who
have got up this new doctrine.
Well, is not that enough? Must there not:
be an end to the question some day! Must
we not know some day what is the meaning
Of our Constitution? For sixty-four years,
the Courts of the United States have 50 de-
ci,ed, and Con, ,ress has 50 decided, and Cab
int Ministers have SO decided; Presidents,
of every complexion and degree of partlzsn-
ship, have agreed to it, and no, all at once.
We throw it away, and We are tod that they
did not know anything about it all the time,
TGat is playing at the old game of sgo devil
AMI patent plow. over again.
Next year, suppose Cnief Justice Taney
to die. VIII not that decision be reversed!
Now | wish you to understand that l don't
admit the court has decided that question at
ALL because the question was not before it.
and we never regard decision of colrt
upoa any point Of law, unless thai poius was
in the case. But if they have. what have
/ they done? Oyerruled their own decision;
overruled their predecessors; and such pre-
decessors. l hold to the judgment Of Mar
shall. my brother ID emocrat, before that o
Mr. fancy, if he has decided it. hold it i:
a case where every brother has ri ,ht to his
private judgment, seeing that the same cour
has decided other wise. when they were more
likely to know more abut it than we do Oh
can.
INHERENT RIGHTS.
want now to read for the benefit of th.
weak brethren. laughter, passage or tw,
from one of the apostles. Laughter
don't use these words in a sense of levity a
all. They occur to me as being very appro
pirate. Ou or about the 4th of March, IS O
| was present when this speech was made
In claiming the right for the inhabitants IN
assisted by Congress TO legislate for Terri
tory iu this proviso, It is assumed that tn
sovereignty over the Territory is vested il
the Territory" 'Sauatter Sovereignty
Do really think they might have inveated
better adjective than that to go before til
word sovereignty. ''squatter." There is some
thing in it 10 raise laugh. .'Or to expires
it, he continues. ''in the language used b.
the resolution offered By the Senator from
Texas. Houston, they have the same inhe
rent right Of self-goyernment as the people O