Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1866-04-19

therefor. This decision makes the dealing In
Government securities much safer business, as
it affords protection to innocent parties.
The Present gress.
| The passage of the Civil Rights bill over the
veto of the President, andthemeans adopted by the
radical majority to effect this result has given rise
to the question of the constitutionality OF the
present Congress Mr. McDougall, the Senator
from California, when the resolution for commu-
nicating to the Executive Department the Civil
Rights BILL as passed over the Presidents veto'
suggested, by way of question, that the bill mas
not legally passed because all the States were not
represented in Congress. Without reply to this
pertinent question, the resolution was passed.
IF there be any force III the inquiry, ana we
must think there is it not settled by the pas
sage of the resolution, hut will come up again IN
a different tribunal. If Congress be not Legally
constituted is the Civil Rights bill the law OF the
land and is the President Obliged to e1-
ecute it +? The Constitution Of the United States
expressly declares that each State shall have at
least one representative" and that the Senate
of the United States shall be composed OF two
Senators from each State, and also that " REPRE-
sentation and direct taxes shall be apporhoned
among the several States according to thelrrespec-
tive numbers And again, the most emphatic OF
all the provisions of the Constitution is one IN
reference to prohibition to exclude States from
their Just and legal representation, which Is not
left subject to the amending power; this clause
alone is guarded from change by the power which
makes other changes. Saysthe Constitution, (" No
State acihom ats consent, shall be deprived OF Its
equal suffrage in the Senate"
Tried by these tests, that the present Congress
is not legally constituted body, there can be but
little doubt. This question is attracting the at
tertion and consideration its Importance demands
Probably, should Congress have gone on enactlng
and necessary laws whether properly
not they would have been acqulesced
in and made legal by common consent Oh by the
healing application of succeeding Congress, but
when they pass hurtful and unconstitutional meas
ure over the veto of the President, having first
violated the sacredness of elections and ignored
the rights of persons and property in order to &C
complish this end, it does not follow that their
action should be acquiesed i'll by the Executive
That this matter is attracting the thoughtful
of the President, is demonstrated by
the course of the papers which are friendly to his
and by the following significant ex
tract from the comments of the Memphis A1yus, |
q
Tennessee
"He (the President intends, firmly, to that all the
States have that representation Congress to which the
entities them, and TO recognize majority Of
The Representatives Of all tie States the Congress-.
The entire vote in the Senate upon the Civil
Rights Bill was thirty three in the affirmative and
fifteen in the negative. A full Senate is composed
of seventytwo votes, and all of the Senators from
the excluded States would have voted to sustain
The President and against the bill, which, with the
votes of Mr.. Dixon and Mr. Stockton, would have
been thirty nine i'll the negative 1t is thus shown
hat in full Senate the Radicals could not only
not have passed the bill over the veto, but would
lot have been able to pass it at all. The veto
hus overridden by a minority of those entitled to
tote upon the question. Can it possibly have been
by the trainers of the Constitution,
When authority given to twothirds to pass
ill over the veto, that it could be done by mi
lority of either body?