The Hillsborough recorder. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1820-1879, 1862-01-22

culated only to encourage the enemy, weak
en- ourselves, and to bring our legislation in.
to ridicule and disrespect at home and abroad,
and degrade our citizens in their own es-
teem-as an officious intermeddling with the
province of the Congress of the Confederate
States-as libel upon the people we repre-
sent, whose noble alacrity, patience, perse.
verence. self-denal and bravery in this con-
test deserve all praise. Whereas, the pass
age of such measure and its appearance ON
the statute book, in The present times, and
much more in the future, iE all historical in
| depreciation must be construed to imply an
imputation of widespread disaffecton. pro-
test against it, finally, as an imitation of
Northern despotism, outstripping its model
mo other State of the South having con-
ceiyed such an idea, though in several of
them dlsaffection not only is rife, but treason
stalks abroad in arms.
But the committee plants itself on a pre-,
cedent in an act of the General Assembly of
l777. and says all the material parts of this
ordinance are copied from that act. Prece-
dents in the peadings of the law are said to
be dangerous things, if one does not know
how to fill up the blanks; and statutory pre-
cedents are equally fallible and deceptive as
guides to political action, it we shut our eyes
TO the circumstances and surroundings of
historical facts which distinguish former
times from our own. Let me inquire Of the
committee, whose chairman holds high ju-
dicial station, whether this ordinance does
not contrayene the Bill Of Rights and Con-
stitutioh in the particulars have enumerat-
ed, and if it does, whether similar act pass
ed in l777, BY the General Assembly, did
not equally contravene it-and when an act
Of the General Assembly does come in con-
flict with the Constitution, which. is to give
way! He is obliged to answer, the act of
Assembly. of course. But it was not so un>
derstood in IVY. The opinion seems to
have prevailed then, and for years afterwards,
that the General Assembly was as omnip0tent
as the British Parliament, and when, in 1886,
the courts of justice decided an act of the
Legislature to be unconstitutional, il pro-
duced great shock in the minds OF highly
intelligent men. This act of 1717, which
undertook to Danish lreemen who were in.
habitants OF the State at the adoption OF the
Constitution, or to deprive them Of the right
Of suffrage il they refused to take an oath Of
allegiance. was clearly unconstitutional, not
only in the points already specified, but in
assuming to take away the right Of suffrage
in the face of the provision OF the COnstitu-
ton declaring that all freemen 81 years of
age, who have been inhabitants certain
time, and paid public taxes, shall exercise it.
But, waving the Constitutional question, the
situation of our ancestors in 1857, differ
ed essentially from ours at this time, in ma.
ny particulars to their disadvantage; aud IN
the poverty Of their resources. and newness
Of their experiment. it should not surprise
us that they laid hold Of test oath as wea-
pom with which bigotry and arbitrary power
had sought to Tortily themselves in Europe,
hoping they could render il useful in the de-
fence Of freedom here. They may possibly
have thought that as allegiance under mon
archy is considered due to the person OF the
sovereign. II might still linger in the breasts
Of some, and that this violent remedy should
be resorted to for its expulsion But before
we are called on to follow this as prece-
dent, it should be shown from subsequent
history that it was of some avail in the con-
test. II was provided in the act that the
name Of every person taking IL should he
subscribed il a book, 10 be deposited in tiie
Office of the Clerk OF the County Court.
Who has ever seen such books The hon
orabe gentleman from Mccklenburg, MIR.
Osborne. who has just taken his seat, has
made considerable researches IN the public
papers Of his county, which is one Of histori-
cal renOwn; has he ever found such book!
Have you, Sir, or any other gentleman here:
One of two conclusions is certain. Either
that there was no general attempt to exact
such an oath, which is the more probable;
or, that il exacted, it had not the least effect.
For when the British invaded the State
in l7s0-'sl. the Tories rose in those sec
tions where they were known to be IN the
outset Of the war, and in no other. The act
was. therefore. as characterized by the gen.
tleman from Richmond. Mr.. Leake, brtiinn
tiiin,al, producing no eNicaeious result.
On looking into 4lh Blackstone's Com. p. l2i. Il
will be seen thai the whole Of this statute Of 717, IN
relation 70 test oath, and punishment o. disffanchise.
meni as citizen, is literally copied from the statute Of
George Ist against Popsh ccusants SO that the ord-
nance OF the committee is but copy Of an act Of lll5