Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1885-03-26
THE NINE LAWYERS.
A Question eff Governme mt Forty
Years Ago.
Providene Journal.


IL March, 1842, says correspond
ent of the Journal, there was publish
ed III this city a remarkable document.
1t appeared ina newspaper of a very
limited circulation, and which the So
called respectable class would not be
seen reading. The feeling about what
was called the suffrage of newspapers
at that time it is now difficult to un~
derstand When one Of them was
seen at the door Of nay Office in the
"Granite building" very kind old
gentleman, who occupied an insurance
office on the same floor, in the most
friendly manner advised me to stop
that paper if [ expected to have any
business. About this time a promin-
ent bookseller in Hartford, Conn,
kept the works of DR.. Claiming under
a counter, lest the exposure of them
should deprive him of his orthodox
custom. IL this city, as a rule. only
men with long hair, and women with
i'll fitting clothes and advanced ideas
ventured to hear Theodore Parker's
lectures on the bible, which would
now be considered very conservative;
and Wendell Phillips narrowly es-
capped being mobbed while pleading
for the rights of the negro in language
which might not m1sbeseem the lips
of Cicero or the pen of Junius.
The document to which I allude is
known as the opinion of nine lawyers.
It is rarely met with. Many people
have heard of it who never read it,
but it would repay the careful study
of all who are interested in political
philosophy or political history. Here
are the names Of its authors. Sam'l
Y. Atwell, Joseph Z. Angel, Thomas
E. Carpenter, David Daniels, Thomas
w. Dorr, Levi @. Eaton, John P.
Knowles, Dutee J. Pearce, Aaron
White, Jr.
The object Of this document was to
show that the peoples constitution
which, as its friends claimed, had been
adopted by majority of the people in
the previous November, was the fund
amental law Of the state. It was a
defense of the theory concerning Am
erican constitutional law, now COM
monty known as Dorrism, much talk
ed about and not always correctly
understood. Briefly stated, 1t was
this:
That the people IF the states Of this
union subject only to the constitution
of the United States, might at any
time, by vote of the majority, make
such change IN the fundamental law
of the state as might SEEM to them
proper, and that without any author
ity derived from the existin overn-
ment Of the state. This dOc, inc, in
its general terms, had been asserted
by Washington, Hamilton. Jefferson,
Madison, Marshall. and oher men of
limitation, and was reserved with very
assent by the people Of the country.
This doctrine was asserted not as a
right Of revolution, but as legitimate
exercise by the people Of the sovereign
power, any resistance TO which by the
existing government was rebellion.
| am not aware that any one Of the
lawyers who signed that document
ever modified his opinion or doubted
its correctness. I am certain that no
one Of them came to the aid Of Mr..
Dor. when he attempted to put the
peoples constitution into practical
operation by military powers.
The Milwaukee, Lake Shore 6
Western depot Office at Oshkosh, was
III e n 4