Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1868-03-12
JUDGE BLACKS SPEECH.


From Judge Blacks great speech in
the McCardle case, which has appeared
in pamphlet form, the following extracts
have been takeh. In relation TO the
origin and passage of the reconstruction
measures he speaks as follows;
Look, then, at what occurred at the
time this bill was passed through Con-
gress. II was reported from committee
unaccompsnied by any argument In
| tended to vindicate II against the assauits
UPON its constitutionality which might
have been anticipated. II went through
the House with very little debate aud was
sent to the President, who returned IL
with n message, in which he demon
strated, at least to his own satisfaction,
that il was wholly unconstitutional. In
stead of reconsidering II in the light oil
the objections that he made to Il, they
scarcely heard the message read until
they passed il over his veto by major
| ity Of two-thirds; without vindlcating
themselves against the charge that he
made, they heard themselves arraigned
by the Chief Magistrate Of the nation for
having violated the Constitution, and
they stood mute before the bar Of that
arraignment f. .-.s.
New, although there was no defense
made against the objection Of unconsti-
tutionality, they were not all satisfied.
Some did speak out, and there was one
man there whose opinion is worth more
than all the rest of them put together,
because he is beyond all question pre-
eminently the superior Of all OF them. L
do not pretend to say that the others may
not be very gigantic in their attainments,
that they may not be very tall OF stature
but
"He, above the rest
In shape and gesture proudly eminent
Stood like tower.
Moreover, he was the author of that
bill; be drew it up, his heart conceived
it, his brain forged it out, his hand drew
| il; he knew exactly what was meant by
| it; and what did he say about in Why,
he threw it down amongst them, aud told
them il was outside the Constitution.
When any of his associates undertook
to vindicate it on the ground that IT
might be constitutional, he launched
down his rebuke to them with his lofty
contempt. 1t was his pleasure and his
pride to make them pass it, in spite OF
the Constitution which he and they had
both sworn to support And they did It,
And should the judgment of this court
decide to day that it was inside the Con-
stitution, he would say it was not, and he
would laugh you to so0rn.; .
Now. under these circumstances, it is
surely allowable for me to say that any
man who, with his eyes wide open to the
consequences, will deliberately and will
fully obliterate all those limitations, and
| reduce this free Government to q mere
| oligarehy, without limitation of powers
compelling the people either to endure
the total loss of their liberty, or else re-
cover it by means of bloody war, such
! a man is wholly unworthy of any kind oi
public Office; he is fit only for " treason,
stratagem, and spoils;" he is an enemy
to the human race, a moral monster, as
much worge than Robsspierre as Robe
spierre was worse than George Washing
| ton.
The grand, chief, fendish leader must
have sat for this picture. No one will
mistake Wade, or Sumner, or Phillips
for the arch tyrant of all, who, in his
cruel remorseless and desperate work oi
revolution, holds the Puritan rod of iron
and strikes terror to the hearts OF his
followers.
From English history Judge Black
| draws illustrations to show that we have
gone further in violation of our Constitu'
| ton, and been more despotic than any
nation at the close Of an insurrection
against its authority, as follows:
There was a rebellion against the Eng
lish Government in the reign of George
III, which was put down by the army un-
| der the Duke of Cumberland at the
battle of Culloden The rebels were
scattered, and the rebellion was at an
end. The feeling between those who
supported the regular government and
those who were engaged in tryiRg to
overthrow it and replace the Stuarts upon
the throne was, perhaps, as acrlminous
as any feeling that ever existed between
anv two parties in the world. A great
mapy violent things were done after the
close of the rebellion. But there was
not living man in the island OF Great
Britain who undertook to assert that the
rebellion and the suppression of the re-
bellion mad the consequence OF increas'
| ing the power Of the English Govern
nent. The act of Union between Scot
land and England continued to be pre-
eisely the same as before, and every
Seotchman had precisely the same rela-
ton to the English King and to ParlIa-
ment that he had before.
Take another case the case of the
Monmouth rebellion against James the
Second. There not only Rll Scotland
rose up to support the pretensions OF the
Duke of Monmouth, and with the inten-
ton of oyerthrowing the existing govern.
ment. and all the western counties OF
England united, and were engaged In 1t
nearly to a man. 1t was ended at the
battle of Sedgemoor; the leader OF 1t
became a fugitive, and finally was cap
tured and beheaded. The rebellion was
completely suppressed; and the govern
ment, the successful government, was
conducted by class of men who would
have done anything in the world that 1t
was possible to do. consistently with their
own safety, in order to wreak their ven
gence upon those Who had opposed them.
II was James the Second who was at the
head Of II, as Sunderland was his Prime
Minister, and Jeifries was the Chief
Judee on the Kings Bench, There was
a set of people as likely to claim all the
povers they could as we're ever combined
10 carry on a government. But neither
Jefries. nor Sunderland, nor the King
himself ever pretended TO say that the
suppression Of the Monmouth rebellion