The People's vindicator. [volume] (Natchitoches, La.) 1874-1883, 1879-03-29
A Common Sense View Of Law.

Answering tho argument Used by
the bODdbolders and their Attorneys
that the State debt Of Louisiana il
inviOlate because it is in the nature
of a contract, which the CODssifu'
ton Of the United States has forbid
den them to impair, involves the re-
opening of the whole question, but
on more vital grounds. that has,
since the adoption of the Federal
Constitution, been . source Of v'o'
lent discussion, and even disastrous
war.
The right to construe tho organic
law Of our federation by implication is
q dangerous doctrine. 1t wac de-
uounced by Mr.. Henry and his col.
leagues in the Virginia Convention,
and SO clearly and logically condemn
ed, that had the advocates of its
adoption assumed the right to "a
Judge that instrument, 90 constr"e i,s
provisions, 1t would have been .
thing Of history, an epoch Of human
failure, instead Of the fundamental
law Of q great people.
Because the Constitution clearly
prohibits States from passing Laws
which will impair contracts it 10 =
false and dangerous doctrine to hold
that this, by implication can be dis
torted to cover and effect the sover.
eigu capacity, the sovereign power Of
the State itself, 40 we'll as it's legisla-
ton.
Contracts are lawfal agreements,
to do certain things, between legal
bodies or persons: Ergo, persons or
bodies that erist Of right BY lac. A
State has no such existence. It is
sovereign, and . creator of bodies
and persons Of law. A State cannot
he compelled by any legal process ia
observe the stipulstions of any obi.
CATION; it cannot be sued and seized
upon to compel the performance Of
any agreement; hence. the very at
gamcnts now being adduced 10 cup.
port Of the moustrous proposition
that State debt partakes Of the
nature and is q contract 10 q legal
sense, is absurd.
To say that becauee the bonds are
in the hands Of innocent third parties
adds nothing to the argument. The
same conclusion confronts that pre-.
mise-tho State cannot be compelled
by law to pay. What can be more
absuId than to suppose that form ia
essence; yet, on that supposition
lies all foundation for the childish
doctrine now being advanced BY the
agents Of the Bondholder. These
gsdgriods forget the legal require.
ments necessary 10 constitute apeou>
tract, and 10 their Wild worship fi,r
even the forms Of law, have gone An
far az to contend that = minor, who il
exempted BY Law from being a party
to contracts, may "c"ntract, bat that
contract, If violated, cannot liz en-.
forced 10 law" a a..9
II this is not the veriest prever-
ton Of common sense, then No arc
mistaken. A@- =.
Before il can be claimed that the
pnblic debt is . contract 10 tho sense
implied and sought to be conveyed,
Il must possess oil tho requirements
Of law necessary to that ful6llment.
First, tho contracting parties must b
ame"sbls to legal process aud II MT,
no "form" devised BY nan can give
any document legal standing. save in
name, which 10 90 empty honor.
A p"blic debt 10 simply = pledge !;
aud ito payment lice 10 the honor Ct
q people. II tho people Of this com.
monweal,h can be saiislied that tho
present State debt was honestly con.
tracted, and that they pledged them.
selves tn the Bondholder to pay II,
then ws venture to cay they viii 1e.
quite It to tho last penny. Until
that l. clearly proven, however, we
contend they have tho moral right to
resist tho payment Of . single faith.
ing. f',', .a ,':e
: The Poll Tax,