The Centre reporter. [volume] (Centre Hall, Pa.) 1871-1940, 1871-11-17


Il only In one condition OF thinga-the oX-
istenee OF invasion or domestic violence, |
The language OF the provision Is that the
United States shall protect each ot thom''
lthe States against invasion, aud, on APP
plication ofthe Legislature. or OF the ma
ecutiye (when the Legislature cannot be
eonvenedl, against domestic violence,
Under this latter authority, Congross pass
cd the act of 18th Fuhuary, lIpa, by which
Il Is provided lthe restriction of the Con
sttution being rescrNedl that IN case OF an
insurruotion In any state against the gov
eminent thereof, u shall be lawful for the
President, when called upon by the State
Legislature, whom Ia session, or by the rN'
eoutiyc during the recess, 10 uso such
force as he may deem necessary 10 suppress
the insurroction, The statesmen OF powerc
careful 90 observe all the limitations on
the powers oi tho general government, aud
not 20 Interfere With any ut the powers be-
longing 10 tho States. In passing the act
under which the President Is nov proceed.
ing IN South Carolina, this constitutional
security afforded the States uT not having
the armed power OF the general govern
ment 20 suppress domestic violence within
is limits, unless applied lor by the govern
mcnt Of the State Is totally disregArded'
Congress, ia the first place by the act do
ted States Is 10 be used, and the President
il 20 decide for himself whether IL Is 90 DO
use or not He may, therefore, use t.
aud Congerss may authorize him 10 use u,
not only without the request Of the state,
but against It's protest Can any one iHil
90 see that this Is not only violation ui
the constitution, but necessarily serves TO
make the United States u consolidated aud
centralized government and Hacqul'cod
In by the people, will vest Ia Congress ana
the President every political power, ana
thus defeat the.dcviaFed purpose OF the con-
slitution, and sooner ar later be mtal a. hb-
eFty itselff IL seems to me incomprrhen
sible that Congress should have supposed
they had authority 20 pass the law 10 quest
ion under the tfth section ofthe fourteenth
amendment That, certainly, docs not, ~
express words, give such power, ahd 4
think Il may be considered rs certain that
II u had, IN terms, given u, the amend
ment never would have been ratlhed
The words used are, "Congress shall have
poWerto enforce, By appropriate legislation,
the provisions of this article" Can Il be
maintained that the means which Congress
is autherzed to adopt are TO be any every
means without any constitutional restric'
tom Congress, under this provision, can,
u Is true, legislato, but can they legislate
in utter disregard of every constitutional
limitation upon is power This can hare
ly be pretended Indeed, the provision
clothes Congress, with no power which u
would not have possessed without it BAL
this power whether implied oF granted i 10
be taken ia stfbordinalion 10 the express
limitations upon It's authority, and these
are that the rightfai powers ui the States
are not TO DO interiertd wiIh-that the
guaranteed rights Of the citizens are not
10 be violated and as one 0f the securities
Of these rights that the privilege % the
writ OF habeas corpus is not 10 DC denied 10
him In time OF peace aud when there is no
armed resistance on his part. In eOnjun
ton with Others aud in hi, State, which,
In view of the Constitution amounts 10 70
bellion or insurrection, aud the public safe
~ requires 10 be suppressed by force oi
arms, The effect OF the suspension OF The
writ Of habeAs corpus aud declaration II
martial law Is 20 placethe StAloand its eth
gems without any security, constiIut ional
or otherwise. For, AS Was correctly state
ed by the Duke Of Wellington, martial
Law i no law ni all n Ii is the mere wall
Of the commander. and during is eontln-
nance Is an unmixed, desp0iisn. Can the
people ofthe United States be 80 blind
aud 80 forgeifll Of the duties which they
owe 20 the men who achieved our freedom
as any longer 10 permit n continuance IA
power Of the party by which such laN
has been enforced. IL has been said by an
Englishman that our people are more in-
different 10 the Importance and value oi
the writ OF hAbeHs corpus than his country
men, for ours did not. as his did, obtain Y
by force in other words. .asAs Tor a..
The rights secured hy odF Constitution are
in substance, bat transcript OF the consti-
tutional rights Of England. and especially
is that the case with regard 10 the writ ~
hAbeas corpus. Many ofJhcse rights are
in Englands great charter, which was OBJ
tanned, sword In hand, from King John :
and our constitutional provision IA relation
10 the writ ia question Is taken, almost 10
words, from habeas corpus act Of Char
les II. feel satisfied that II such law -
the one have examined and such an exc
euiiOn Of il as is now going ON ia South
Carolina, WAS passed by the Engiish Par
Lament, aud Was enforced hy the govern
ment, the people OF the country would
With one voice drive from power all the
parties concerned IN it Are Americans
less devoted 20 liberty than the subjects
OF her majesty Can We who often boast,
and heretofore with truth, that We arc
amongst the freest. il not the frecsi, people
on earth, submit 20 such legislation. or
will We not, when the proper time comes 60
speak through the ballut.boS with one
abused and are abusing the most sacred
provisions OF our Constitution and che
dearest rights Of ircemeug Is not the
right which is now being denied 10
South Carolina one Of th" most vital TO
political and civil freedom Does lit cgty
exist anywhere where such right is de-
MED ? Il must be very clear 10 the com
preheasion OF any rejecting man that u
cannot In the words Of Blackstone, him
self the advocate of strong government
and the warm and able supporter Of the
prerogatives ofcrown, in referring 20 the
value ofthe writ III il were once lefl In
the power ofany, the highest magistrate to
imprison Arbitrarily whomeyer be OF his
officers thought proper tas ~ France " -
daily practioed by the CROWN, there would
soon be an end Of all other rights and i'm
munities. There are various other views
in which the question l have discussed
might be presented and enforced. but ]
have not the time 10 lay them before YOU.
believe that have said enough 10 con-
vince any rejecting and impartial mind
that the act OF Congress OF April -, 1871,
in the particulars 20 which have referred
and the Presidents course under H. have
no warrant in the constitution, and are de-
structive Of the rights Of the states and OF
individual citizens.
CORRESPONDENTS.
A.