The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-01-23
FISHBACK ON BENCH LAW"
Two Important Decisions of the Federal
Supreme Court Discussed.
Effect of the bred Scott Case-Wide Influence
of the Dartmouth College Ruling on
Corporation Franchises.

The feature at the meeting of the Prog.
ress Club. in their rooms in the Mansur
Block. yesterday afternoon, was q legal
talk by w. Z. Fishback. The attendance
of both sexes was large. Though legal
talk is usually dry. the audience
appreciated the handling of the
questions discussed by MIR. Fishbock.
as was evidenced by their close attention.
He spoke upon the Effects of Two Decis-
ions of the Supreme Court of the United
States on Slavery and Corporations.
Taking the two leading cases on the two
topics he critically an alyzed the causes of
the cases and the effect of their decisions
upon the whole people.
On the question of slavery he took the
bred Scot case. and considered it with re-
gard to It's significance upon the con dition
of the slavery agitation at the time of It's
rendition. He said: The Constitution of
the United States nowhere IN express
terms recognized slavery. but In three sec
tions it was mentioned. In one it provided
that the Importation shall cease at given
time. $685. the next place 1t was mentioned
in connection with the arpOrtiOnment
for members of Congress-. providing
s son the for Of shsr ' ao
ual number in the appOrtionment;
the third mention was in regard to fugitive
slaves and provides for their return to the
slave States when escaping and captured
in the free States. Mr.. Fishback argued
that the absence of sanction In the instru-
ment of the existing evil and incidental
mention of 1t indicated that it was con-
sidered at that time to Der tottering and
its extinction merely q matter of time.
came to be millions OF dollars involved in
its perpetuatlon, it's continuance
was q matter of great import TO number
of persons, and the bred Scott case was
that case it was settled to be a perpetual
institution and only went down in blood,
when the conscience of the people united
against the effect of the decision.
s, rhs 's'G snk branch Of ME- fsh
was illustrated by the Dartmouth
College case, than which probably
no decision Of the Supreme Court Is more
quoted in matters of cOntractual relations.
The decision IN this case, which involved
the rights of a small State academy. was
in effect that charter was q contract and
that when State Legislature or municipal
council granted charter to . corporation
aud could not afterwards modify the
provisions thereof. He illustrated the
doctrine expounded in this case by citing
the attempt made In this CITY to compel the
street railway company to pave the streets
between the tracks, in which case the COM
pany was successful In it's fight by appeal
ing to the principle of the Dartmouth Col.
lege case; and inasmuch as the charter did
not provide for the pavement. the CON-
pany could not be held to do
it. Judge Davis, of the Supreme
Court. the speaker said. once told him that
the time would come when public opinion
would demand the overruling of that de-
cision on account of it's abuses by corpora
tlons. or at leasta modification of it, SO
that q corporation. by obtainingsa charter
from a council or legislature could not
bind the people for an indefinite number
of years. In this respect. and
speaking of corporations, he incidentally
mentioned their methods of lobbying in
the legislatures and CONGRESS. He thought
the individuality of the latter had materl-
ally deteriorated since the time of Web.
ster Calhoun, Clay and others, and that
from the time when men feared not to ex-
press their individual opinions upon a sub
ject. we had come to O time when only the
caucus spoke. aud the man who dared oppose
or differ with his party outside it's caucus
was Stunned and abandoned by his col
leagues as traitor.
AT the conclusion of the talk the usual
five-minute talks by members was In
dulged in. but not as freely as usual. The
main point discussed was the latter one. In
regard to corporations. and Mr.. Newlin
took occasion to differ with the speaker in
his views upon the individuality OF Con-
gresS.