Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-08-27
FRIDAY...........AUGUST 2T, 1886.
the Consttution-North and South

The people Of Virginia are not revo-
lutionists, nor law-breakers, nor con-
temners Of their northern brethren.
General ScHoFIELD said Of them,
whilst be was military Governor OF this
State, that they needed no rulers, being
so constituted as to be able to rule
themselves. In saying what we said q
few days ago to our Providence con-
temporary our object was to call Its
attention to the fact that in seeking to
have the United States Supreme Court
so changed in its personnel as
to, secure proper respect Tor
and recognition Of the eleventh
amendment TO the Federal Constitution,
the people of Virginia were doing only
ss the northern people had done when
they considered the decisions Of that
court wrong. The Journal replies in
admirable spirit. We would that We
had room for its whole article ; but we
have not. However, we will take care
to do justice to it.
Our contemporary must be joking
when 1t says that whilst the first legal
tender decision was in force sit WAS
obeyed by the North" How could
any man, North or South, have done
otherwise than obey it: Let us call
our contemporary's attention to case
wherein there was no difficulty in either
obeying or opposing the Law OF the land.
We allude TO the fugitiye-slAve law,
based as this was upon a plain provision
of the Federal Constitution requiring
fugitive slaves 10 be delivered up on
demand made in proper form. How
was that law treated in New England?
Who but northern man pronounced
that feature of the Constitution ga
league with death and covenant with
hell "? Who applsuded JOHN Brown
as 8 patriot and hero? Who estab-
lished underground railroads, and as
sisted in stealing all the negro property
that that railroad conveyed from the
North TO the South? Whence came
the influence which induced Mr.. LIN
colin, in disregard Of his oath Of Office,
to issue a proclamation absolutely de-
stroyipg thousands Of millions Of dol
lars worth OF property guaranteed to
the southern people in the most solemn
manner by the organic law of the land!
Is q decision Of the Supreme Court
superior in dignity to provision Of the
Constitution Of the United States? or
the Virginia cases the Journal says:
"What we have said, say, and ali
that is necessary TO say, in this regard,
is that such decision unmodiied, or I'M
reversed, is the law Of the land"
What OF the DRIED SCOTT decision?
Wasn't that the law Of the land? And
how as such was il treated in the north
efn section Of this Unions How did
the platforms of the Republican party
in the various northern States treat the
decision in 1860? If we in Virgins
may be allowed TO treat the decisions oil
the Supreme Court OF the United States
in The Virginia coupon cases as the Re-
publicans of the North treated the de-
eision Of the same court in the DRIED
scoTT case, we shall certainly not ask
to be permitted to subject them to a
we're fate. Now, let us "smilo audi.
bly, " as we read the following remark
Of ovr Providence friend:
"The law Of the Supreme Court o.
The United States was and is law fol
the lovers Of the Constitution in the
North, which is TO say all the North
Wasn't that intended as q joker No
at all. 1t only proves, as We said in th'
beginning, that the Journal has preju
djees which prevent il from doing JUS
tice 10 the Southern people.