The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1866-10-27

the lawful jurisdiction to give law to the
remaining twenty>six states, thirty>one states,
| or thirty-five stales, as the case might be
! Is there any man among US bold enough, to
get up among his fellow men, and 80 read
| the constitution Of the United States Yet
the constitution must be so reac, II the
ostracised districts are states of this union.
! Unlhinking men may reply, that c"tuntdry
withira wal of members from congress, as
happened during the late war, may cause
| congress not to be composed" in the man
ner prescribed by the constitution, aud nee
/ that it will become an illegal body, aud
! wanting in legislative jurisdiction. right,
! or a franchise is not destroyed because 1t Is
/ rot claimed. Congress ,cds I" composed,
In the manner pre-cr,Ded SY the constitution
! during the war, a; the conclusion of the war,
! and up to the time of the deinltive exclusion n,
I by swo hundred and forty three members of
| congress- of the other seventy members. There
! were the franchises OF the constituencies OF
these seventy members, reposlng, III all their
vitality aud unimpaired, In their hands
! Those constituencies did not choose To exer-
else those franchises. Their failure TO do so,
they had none but themselves to blame for.
Their refusal to exercise them could not take
away the jurisdiction of the re-na'ng two
hundred and forty>three members, to give
Z
of three hundred and thirteen members
Seventy OF them declined to exercise their
functions. Did that destroy the - compost.
tiDn' OF congress? q? There Is no man Uf
reputation who would put forth a pretension
so pueriIe. Equally puerlle would be the
prrtension that any constituency failing to
elect, would alter the composition OF cons
gress. The riyht was there unimpalred, OF
the failure to exercise 1t, none could cons
plain. But when the right, the franchise
itself is arnulled, destroyed. essentially
impaired those who annul ed, destroyed, or
/ essentially impaired II, have no right to turn
round and say that they are a congress
"cOmposed'' ;.S the constitution prescribes,
and are competent to give law ~ the cOn>
stItuenceS whom they have excluded from
the RI ght 10 compose pat OF their own trl-
buual. NJ iarItIes must govern, III repub-
lic 1 i SAID, and Is true they may govern
unwiseiy. and OpprossIseiy 1t Is SAID, aud yet
not lose their title to govern, ana that IS
true; the remedy Is at the ballot box But
if the majority NAV legally seal up the ballot
box against a minority, what IS ;he remedy
then? Plainly there is none except fighting.
Ii they may legally do it, how long would
even Il majority govern III such case? If
they may .eal up the ballot box against
mlE rity. what OF law or reason is TO prevent
their sealing it up after that minority, by
accessloas to its strength. have become
major "? Ia that case. 1t Is Il minority,
governing a majority at their own despoiIc
I VIII anb !l-asUre
! Can o., ,aat such is the -Gprene law- uf
this isaI? And vet it * the las Of this land,
It n tes >:atcs are yei sta,es OF this anIn },
ar4 s.s .r6.HIl Of this government. ma:
/ s-a. u...-. ballot box against either minors
} ....r or ... -,rIlies h.vius now disposed pf
: tlis .Ues.... TO the I ,lcut tha' | proposed 10
dJ--tcr my iu:eI.r-1n was Father 10 initiate
thau fully I.scass It, all now examine the
erlu 4 t4at uuIersl4ud TO be occupied by
/ the n.Ost responsible portion Of tile radical
. party Ia doing which | shall also examine
. the two remaining propositions stated at the
I commencement .: this paper
The radical position is. that South Caro-
lima. North Carolina. Florida, Altbamr,
Mississippi. Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas,
are rot sta. Is v. this union, bat conquered
country. and as slch, bound TO receive law
from ih. power that conquered II. That |,
/. but.,. clear. aad distinct proposition. and
tIe n4iv pue ever put iOrth as Il statement OF
u tue upon which the assumed authority OF
/ congress over those states rests, that Is worth
an examiratiun. This is ;le raiics.' plat
form; if it can be ma iiItainei. then congress
are not acting ILL.,. gally in their dealings with
the south: if it cannot be maintained. then
this assumed cong e-s Is no congress. by
right. Is acting legally. and Is 9uIltj OF the
exercise oi uslrped power.
! II cOrsrcss do possess the fowes they
/ as ert. when did they acquire II? 1t was
/ never asserted before the war, during the war
/ or at the conclusion vf the var. The op-
/ posite was asserted by ongress :lseit, and by
. u u IL MT
/ It's end. The title upon winch we went to
/ war was, thai the political ties which Usnnd
/ the union together were iud!sSOla5le that
! the union Was ,u2ostruc'Iie. except by =
J successful revolution: that Il coul II not be
/ DESTROYED by al UlaGccessful rebellion We
prosecuted the war upon that title We con.
cuaed II upon tnai title; d'r' tte e!'emy tt'd
d1cn ttct- arms HVOa ihdt tttc, because '9e
! ccstDsliet hellt to submit to II. |. was 10 our
/ vim,ilcation OF that title by force OF arms that
/ they capitulated. Even il the doctrine OF
! congress were well founded therefore, II could
not be enioI ced upon our late enemies with
! out most dislonoraGie violation of public
! filth II the doctrine OF congress is not well
founded 10 enforce it is, there or. 10 b.: guilty
both of a violation OF public faith, and the
exercise of usurped power.
The doctrine Of congress then is, that an
/ Whrre did congress get the power 10 decide
that question? Is it Judicial question
The constitution plainly declares that the
supreme juGIcial power Of the nation is
vested IN the Supreme Court of the United
States. l. It au adm nistrative question
The constitution as plainly declares that the
supreme executive power OF the nation Is
vested in the President of the United States.
Is ii a legislative question? W here did con
gress get the power to legi5late state out OF
the Union? Is it political question: arising
under the law of nations? Plainly it Is that
if it is anything. And who, or what, | Ia e
leave to enquire, has conferred on congress
the ercllsiCe jurisdiction OF interpreting the
law of nations, ana after Interpreting II, tG
execute it, to Garry it into effect as they
claim the right OF dClng.-io carry IL ,'o
! effect by dismembering the Union? Ii .
right exists, under the law of nations, to dis
member the Union, does 1t NOT piainly re-
, ouirc the action of the Suprenie Court to Sc
interpret the law, the acton OF the Iresiden
TO execute 1t, aud 'istly, the action OF con
: or IS to supply such needful legislation,
any, as NAV be required, by reason ot suci
dismembernuen;? Plainly, then, whether i
be true or not that an unsuccessful resea'ioi
n sewers the state or states where it occirS lrou
e the Union, it is question thai congress
has has not jurisdiction TO decide
!, But suppose they had the jurisdiction
y have they decided the o'estlon right!
=. Thsv have dec, lett contrary 10 all oul
. : ,rad;,ion. from t,s foundation of the Gov
u ,,, ~, ~ he time of their decision
:. iaI, w,n,er Their decision, as applied to
" 49, ,a,, lies named, is a, er past tacto de
, oi;a,. and therefore illela in its application
: ., len, whether it w0uli be correct and
= 5ht in its appiicadon tC future gases or not
: Ought not that to be sufficient to condemn
their declsion, even if they had Jurisdiction
That 1t conflicts with all our traditions tha,
II reyerSes their own de cisiou. and that oi