The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1868-01-31

I DNN - iuSkC l4ltDlllan lOfi-
motion, when Thomas ". Dorr, ESQ.,, twenty.
years ago, assembled his little band OF rebels
aid novel on the Rhode Island arsenal al
| Proyd2nce. But Thomas was a sort oI
American Gracious, did very little harm
except to get himself locked up in prison
and was the occasion OF the existence upon
| the judicial records Of the United States o
most Faluable precedent Tor application tc
present political complications. This preee.
| dent Is what Is known as "the Rhode Island
case," and 1t has been very frequently refer.
| ed 10 In recent debates on reconstruction and
the jurisdiction OF the Supreme Court in
| matters arising under the acts of Congress
relating to the Southern States.
The story of "the Dorr Rebellion is told
In few words. Until 1s43 Rhode Island
was stil governed under the charter granted
to the State by Charles II In 1868, which
contained no provision for change or amend
ment OF the organic law. The Legislature
had power to establish the qualifications oI
voters, and hai never removed the Limitation
of the franchise to treeholders. Only about
third OF the people who under a more DEM
ocratic government would have been eIl-
braeed 10 The body polite, could vote. Ef-
forts had been made from lime to time to In
duee the Legislature to call convention for
the formation OF new constitution, fol- the
Old charter was beginning to be considered
an fntolerable Luisance But the landowners
who held tie baIaI ce OF power In the Iegis-
lature would not listen, though Dorr, who
was repeatedly a member of that body, spar
Ell no pains to iorce the iubIeet upon their
attention, All length in ls42 the people,
under the leadership of Oorr, took the mat
ter into their own hands. He was q lawyer
OF considerable ability, having studied bis
profession with the great master. Chancellor
Kent. Under his direction the people
voluntarily assembled and elected del
egate convention that framed eonsti-
tuition, which in due time was ratl-
fed by !arge majority of the people.
Subsequently State election was held
under the new constitution, almost contem-
poraneousy with the election under the char
ter. The constitutional government estsb-
iished Itself at Providence, the charter gov
eminent at Newport. So there were two
governments IN full operation, each with its
executive and legislative departments fully
organized Thomas Dorr was Governor al
Providence and Samuel ". King at Newport.
But now matters necessarily came to crisis,
and both parties appealed to arms. Govern
or King called upon President TYLER TO PRO
'ect the State Of Rhode Island from domestic
violence, and proclaimed martial law: Gov.
Dorr on the 18th OF May prepared 10 attack
the arsenal at Providence, but Withdrew up
on the approach of Gov. King with the mill
tia. Afterwards, on the 25th of the same
month a large number of insurgents assem-
bled at Chepachet, ten miles from Providence,
but retired upon being attacked by the State
forces, and by the 28th the affair was over.
Dorr took refuge in Connecticut and after
wards in New Hampshire, but was finally Az
rested, brought to trial for high treason,
found guilty and sentenced to imprison nent
for life. In 1647 he was pardoned, and lived
till 1854 under the very form of government
which he had fooshly attempted to establish
by force OF arms, for in the year following
that er'the rebellion new constitution was
adopted by the people under the regulations
established by the proper authorities.
Such are the short and simple annals of
Thomas Dorr. His brief career as an insur-
gent chiefwas entirely blocdless, and the lit
tie tempest in tea pot with which his name
Is associated would be speedily forgotten,
were ii not for the impol tant question set
tied by the national judiciary on case aris-
ing out Of the civil conflict THE Rhode Isl
and case" is this: During the period OF fla
grant war, while martial law was in force
throughout the State, party Of the State
militia, by direction of one OF their officers
broke into the house OF an insurgent named
Martin Luther who was supposed to be con
cealed there. AT the conclusio nof fhostilities
Luther brought an action of trespass
against one Borden, who was among those
who entered his house. The case finally
came before the Supreme Court Of the Unit
ed States for adjudication, and is reported in
the seventh of Howard's United States Re-
ports. The defendant justified his action On
the ground that he MAS acting under the au.
thority of the regular and lawful gorernmen!
OF the State of Rhode Island when he com.
mit.ed the act complained OF, while the
plaintiff insisted that instead OF being AN in
surgent, he himself was at the time engaged
in upholaing the legitimate government Of
Gov. Dorr against the attacks OF Gov Kings
raholc Aynopo ha oounsat for tba Joforo,
was Daniel Webster and the opinion OF the
| the Court was drawn up by Chief Justice
| Taney, who must be accepted as tolerable
| Democratic authority on any question. Tht
| whole case turned, Of course. upon tht
decision nj the question as 10 which
| government was the legitimate one
| That question the Court held had been al
ready decided by the action Of President Ty
Ter, who had Enthusiastically recognized In,
charter government during the progress o
! the troubles, though he had deemed T. unuee
| essary to make use of the United State.
troops. The Court decided that the suthorl
| IS OF the President TO settle the question
arises from the fourth section Of the iourtl
article Of the constitution which declares tha
"the United States shah guarantee TO ever,
State in this Union a republican term of gov
| ernment, and shall protect each OF then
against invasion; and on application OF th
legislature, or OF the executive when the leg
islature cannot be convened) against domesti
| violence" The doctrine Of the Court Is tha
the whole question OF interfering in the a;
fairs of a State and of determining which O
several governments is the legal one rests pri
marily with Congress, but In the particular
matter of protecting States from invasion o
domestic violence, Congress had by law dele
gated to the President Discretionary power
Moreover, it was held that the execution o
| all the powers granted 10 the United State
by the section above quoted belonged sole
to Congress, and that its action was not sub
ject TO the revision or control of either tn
| Executive or the Judiciary. We quote from
Judge Taney's opinion, leaving to the reade
the obvious application OF the views OF tn
Court TO the McCarde and other cases noY
pending before It:
Under the Constitution it rests with Con
| gress 10 decide what government is the estah
| iished one in a State. For, as the Unite,
| States guarantees to each State repubiica,
| government, Congress must necessarily decid
what government is established in the Stat
before II can determine whether it is republi
can or not. And when the Senators and Rep
| rpapntatiyps OF State are nd duitfan into III