The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1869-03-06

Constitution to the general government
therefore the Court made tho reservation
contained in the quotation. In these
same cases, aud in the very opinions
from which the Governor quotes his law the
Court says, ''that in giving the commercial
power to Congress, the States did not part
with that power Misrepresentation, which
must be inherent in every organized com.
mWnity, they may guard against the in.
PRODUCTION of uay thing 1rhich may cor.
ys1ot tae noraiS OF eR,RdHger the health or
lives of their citizens" Again, in the
same opinion, the Court says, "the care Of
dt,,dcring lckat might trouble the internal
tydRgUiiity Of the State, is the basis of
police" aud authorizes the sovereign to
make laws aud establish institutions for
that purpose" Again, the Court says,
show much of it, Cthe police power) have
the States retained 1 answer unhesita-
tingly, says the Justice, all necessary to
their internal government. Generally,
all not delegated by them in the articles
of confederation to the United States of
America all not yielded 6y them Rader
the Constellation Of the Uttitcd iStafeS.-
AG OOuAJ 4uANAtNt ot0NGS AlUNG
also reserved the police right to turn from
their territories, paupers, vagabonds and
fugitives from Justice, and that it (the
police power) is applicable to idlers, vag-
bonds, prupers, fugitives from justice,
and suspected persons. /"
Jastice Greer, one of the majority,
clearly distinguishing between different
classes of persons, to whom different laws
were applicable, says, "it must be borne
in mind (what has been sometimes forgot
ten) that the controversy in this case, is
not with regard to the right claimed by
Massachusetts, in the second section of
this act, to rcpel from her shores lunaties,
idiots, criminals, or paupers, which any
foreign country, or one Of her sister states,
might endeavor to thrust upon her; nor
the right of any State whose domestic Sc
curity might be endangered by the ad-
mission of free negroes, to exclude them
from her borders. This right Of the
States has ats foundation IN the ;Dered
lac Of selEdefence, 'rhich no po,eer grant
ed to Congress can restrain or amend,
and that it is as competent and
necessary for State to provide precau-
tionary measures against the moral pes
thence of paupers, vagabonds and convicts,
as it is to guard against the physical pes
thence which may arise from unsound
and infectious articles imported" What
has just been quoted as the opinion of the
Court, announced by Justice Greer, was
deemed so important, aud so deserving
of being placed beyond question, that
Justice Catron feeling called upon to do
more than merely concur generally, says
"agreeing entirely with my brother Greer
in the principles involved in both causes,
and especially on the State polcer Of er-
ciusion, in particular instances, asked
him to write out our joint views in the
cause coming up from Massachusetts,
This he has done to my entire satisfaction.
and therefore [ have said nothing here on
the reserved powers of the States to pro-
.tect themselves, but refer 10 that opinion
as containing my views on the subject
with which I fully concur Throughout.
As If the more clearly to distinguish
not only between reveRHe measures, and
the exercise by State of its police pouer,
but also between the two classes of persons
upon whom each might appropriately ap-
ply, the Court says ''the passengers in
this instance, (the 295 steerage passen-
gers from Liyerpool) were not subjects Of
any police power or sanitary regulations,
but healthy persons, Of good moral char
.acter, as We are bound to presume, moth
ing appearing to the contrary; nor had
the State Of Neu York, manifested by
her legislation, any objection TO such per-
sons entering the State. That it was in
tended to manifest condition hostile to
the admission of the passengers in respect
to whom the master was sued, is without
the slightest foundation. They were not
hindered or interfered with any degree
by the State law. 1t is general reuenue
measure" These revenue measures the
Court declared to be regulations of COM
merce, in conflict with the Constitution
granting that power to Congress.
So much for the opinions of majority of
the Court sustaining the position, that
police measures were never ceded to the
United States by the Constitution, but
reside In the State, and have their foun-
dation in the sacred law of self defence,
(which no power in Congress can restrain
or annul"
With large class of our citizens, these
positions will be greatly strengthened to
know that the minority of the Court COM
posed of such men as Chief Justice Tany
and Justices Daniels, Nelson and Wood.
berry, not only concurred substantially in
those portions Of the opinions quoted in
which it declared that the police power
is reserved to the States, but that 1t Is
more extensive in its application, than il
Is either necessary, or now proper for us
to claim.
The Chief Justice says, "I think II
therefore to be very clear, both upon
principle and the authority of adjudged
cases, that the several States have a right
to remove from among their people, and
to prevent from entering the State, any
persons or class, or descriptions of per.
sons, whom it Eaay deem dangerous or In
furious to the interes. or welfare of its
citizens"
Says Justice Woodberry, police
measure, in common parlance, often re
lates to something connected with public
morals; and in that limited view, would
still embrace the subject of paupers.-
But IL law, the word police is much broad
er, and includes all legislation for the in
ternal policy of State; nor is it any the
less police measure, because money
rather than bond OF ofindemnity is equired
as condition to protection and privileges