Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1879-10-24
AS Expounded by Hon. ]. G.
Jenkins, Democratic Can
didate for Governor Of
Wisconsin.
A Clear, Logical, Profound and
Eloquent Address.

ana JeHtsntH:
Called from the more congonial pur-
suits OF private professional life to as
sumo temporarily the position OF an APP
plicant for the suf1rages OF the people OF
Wisconsin, ! have yielded all personal
preferences to undertake, what seemed
TO me to be public duty In the per-
Torrance of that duty, appear before
you tonight to express my opinions up.
on certain topics of public interest
those opinions being valuable only from
the representative character which | at
present sustain.
IL seems not improper for me TO
premise that the opinions which ] hold
will be honestly expressed. / am no DO.
liticai trimmer. Ihave been accustom.
ed TO hold and express my sentiments
Mt the dictation Of no party or set OF
men; and ] shall not now sink my inde-
pendence as n man To attain to any of.
flee on earth. What shall say shall be
my honest conviction, whether il pleases
you or not.
STATE RIGHTS.
There appears to be growing up in
this country conflict touching the ma
ture and form of our government; II
conflict which was Ind nj the cradle OF
the constitution, and which il had been
fondly supposed was long ago deter
mined.
Upon the one hand il seems TO be as-
serted that tho national government
should absorb powers not granted by
tho fundamental law. Tho cry is heard
for stronger central government. Just
what il desired, the partisans Of that
theory do not deem IL advisable to state;
but little by little--ycar by yearly al
most imporceptible advances, encr0ach-
ments have been made upon powers
not granted to the federal government,
which will result, unltss checked by the
people, in n gradual change from our
present system OF government into "
vast centralized government OF almost
unlimited power.
Upon tho other hand, IL is claimed
that the system adopted by the fathers
OF the republic, and which finds express
sion IN the constitution they adopted, is
all sufficient, in point OF strength, TO
maintain tho union, and is essential to
perpetuate tho Liberties Of tho people.
II is well, therefore, to ascertain just
what our system Of government is
whether il be sufficient for its mainte-
nance, and whether n change TO some
other system il either desirable, or tends
to promote the liberty and we'll being Of
the citizen.
Upon the successful termination Of
the revolutionary war, two schools of
statesmen were developed, having dis
tinct and opposite methods for the for
nation of our government; the one
lead by that distinguished patriot and
able statesman, Alexander Hamilton
sought to establish government upon
tho model of the British system; having
the powers Of government centralized,
and the subdivisions Of government
shining by the reflected light OF the CEN
trail power; the other-lcad by tho i'm
mortal Jaiierson--decmcd such sys-
tenn dangerous to liberty; believed that
the nearer government got to the peo-
Pile, it was tho safer and the stronger;
and sought to establish u central or ma
tional government to which should be
granted sufficient powers for its main
tonance, .and reserving to tho states or
to the people all powers not granted to
the national government or forbidden
to the states. In the contest which en-.
sued the latter theory was practically
successful. Our constitution was 80
framed, submitted to and adopted by
the several states; and in order TO place
beyond contention the character and
object Of that instrument, the several
states and tho people thereof, within
two years after the acceptance of the
constitution, duly adopted an amend
ment to that instrument, known as Ar
ticle X, which expressly declares that
"the powers not delegated to the United
States by the constitution, nor prohibit
ed by II to the states, are reserved to
the states respectively, or to the peo'
pie"
With reference, therefore, TO this con-
stitution and TO the relations which the
states bear to tho union, II IL manifest
and has been so held. rs we'll by the SUI
prcme court of the United States as by
the courts Of last resort in every state Of
this union, speaking Of this question
that the federal constitution is q grant
of power to the United States govern
ment; TINT rs TO all powers not thereby
granted or prohibited, they are reserved
TO the states or to tho people; and that
therefore, the constitution of Il state is
not u grant Of power, for the power OK
listed in the state and with its people
before and independently of any con
stitution; but is a limitation upon III
existing power. The one is u delegation
or grant of power; the other IL restric
ton or limitation upon an existing
power. This is no new doctrine
II is the very primer Of constitutions
history. Reckless political writers
dealing with this question in tho heat Q
campaign, may rave as they will. i
is doctrine recognized by every states
man, Judge and lawyer in the land. Tn,
supreme court ofthis state, composed a
the,time of such distinguished jurists ii
Luther s. Dixon, Orsamus Cole, and tn,
lamented Byron Payne, asserted thi
doctrine in the case Of Bushnell vs.
Beloit, 10 Wis. Reports, page 225, il
the following language: We suppos
it to be well settled political principl
tkat thn nnnsI,trt;n,, nc tIn stala Il q