Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1881-10-25
MIscELLANEous.
VESTED RI9HTs-No, 9.
IFrom The Farmer.s Friend. i

Inc monopoIists meet every objection
urged'by the farmers to capitalized encroach-
ment upon an equality of labor, by the stcr
eotyped phrase-yested rights In nv first
communication TO your paper on this subject
] alluded to tho probable conflict growing
up between what is claimed by the monopo,
lists as Uested rights and indlicnaJIe .r;ohfs
The English in their law books define vested
rights to be gift; or grant taking effect
from the power of the giver, aud commeuo>
ing IN praesenh, evon though il should be
soivem8wns an future. But by no means can
the grantee or douee enlarge the powors or
limit the gift. Il is "a determined power or
franchise and must he taken, if accepted at
all, upon the express terms given in the
grant; there arc no implied powers in such
gift, be it legislative enactment or other
subject of grant. In order to contrast the
exercise of chartered corporations with in.
alienable rights, wo must also define what is
predicted in tho term as usod in our Bill Of
Rights. 1t is that which cannot be legally
or justly transferred to another. 1t is there.
fore a personality, attaching as Of divine au>
thority. Having justly presented what is
believed to be impartial relation of the
meaning Of the terms employed will try 10
inquire into tho conflict between mans ma
tiOral rights and the rights acquired BIZ Leg
lslaEVe eoactmcnC called charters.
In the first place it is assumed that what
is in conflict with onr iualienable rights is in
itself void under our form of government,
so it the Legislature grants to ono GLASS of
citizens the power under perpetual charter
to do exclusively that which it is tho ius.
right for every citizen to do, it is nuility
when so declared by competent court. So
tho power of enactment is not legally given
to or extended to corporations by exclusive
powcrs under monopoly, as in oontravonti ton
to the organic bill of rights. And to defend
tho excess of power under the plea of vested
rights is falIaoious. So if common carrier
imposes charge upon A. which he does not
upon B. for liko service he violates his
trust, because it is the natural aud inst right
that B. should have the same guaranteed to
him that every other citizon has, circum-
stances being equal. And if determinations
are made in favor of A, B. has Just right
to complain legally of the discrimination.
Courts are organized to insure. when invoked,
both the legal and natural rights of the oiti-
zen. Monopoly is repugnant to personal lib
crty and in direct conflict with it; 30 no man
osn be patriot who violates the inalienabls
law Of our civil polity, bo he official or OK
official; and especially is the man who has
once sworn to support tho constitution uuder
oObSobLouhS no as ITuIn ItH6I1. to Op~
pose both privately and officially all forms of
attack upon republican liberty. And that
monopoly, either in land or in trade, is anti
republican as an axiom. Even in the aris-
tocratic Government of Great Britain mos
nopolists were punished as being offensive TO
trade and as restraint upon the liberty Of
manufacturing or trading. The 4th act of
the old Bill Of Rights of Virginia condemned
monopolies, and the statute of James I. de-
clsred 'mopopolies contrary to law and void"
aud punished with the forfeiture of treble
damages and double costs" And By Ed
ward Wis, "with imprisonment, piIlory, loss
of en- ear, rerpstual infamy aud perpetual
banishmcnt"
It is said by able English Iaw-writst
that the leaders Gin monopoly "felt the
pulse of tho nation, and found that they Cthe
people) had ability as we'll as inclination to
resist it monopoly, aud accordingly resisted
and opposed it." If then, as carly as the
reign Of James l., when all earth's inhabi-
tants were under regal reign, the eneroach>
ments of mooopolists could be restrained,
how great Is the shame that at this late day
Of liberal ideas, and in this typical Republic
gigantic monopolies are permitted to override
both law and justice thereby enabling ar
rogant wealth to crush feeble poverty by at.
tempted legal sanction. And it is painfully
observable with what vjgor the advocates Of
power and might defend privileged nonoLo>
hes with their old weapon-vested rights
Even adrolt lawyers are permitted to infnss
their utopiau notions through farmers jour
mails, in order to fas.en upon community the
general blight incident upon privilegisnu. II
Is great presumption to defend either railroad
or banking monopolies in an agricultural
newspaper, for example, such as TIE Far
n1er's Friend, and yetit is even more strange
to note the silenoe which Prevails in sgrieuI-
tural pages since the report of great gun
in defense of imperious monopoly Even
high Grange officials shrink back 10 awful
terror.
1t will not long be SO. The money bags
have often yielded to the cry of the down
trodden. Revolutions have often demon
strated the paueity of the few in conflict With
the puissauoe of the injured many. Ssn-
culinary conflicts ought never to be invited
It is far better to acknowledge an obligation.
than to be forced to yield to IT, Storms are
better avoided than resisted When the
cloud blaeksns, the prudent seek shelter.