New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-10-03
MR.. HILL ON THE DRIED SCOTT CASE.

David B. Hill has found that sneaking quota
ton from the bred Scott case does not pay.
He was forced by the exposures of his decep-
tive statements at Elmira to pronounce the
name of the negro declared by Chief Justice
fancy condemned to slavery by the Constitu-
ton, and frankly state that the present Demo
cratic doctrine of the constitutional restriction
of Congressional power in the Territories was
based on the reasoning by which Chief Justice
fancy reached his conclusion. But Mr.. Hill
would not be at home on the platform if he
straightforward, and so we find him
affecting surprise that anybody should question
the present binding force of Chief Justice
Taney's arguments-a somewhat curious atti-
tude in view Of his careful concealment from
the people of Elmira that the bred Scott case
was the authority for his declaration that the
settled law Of the land forbade us to have colo
MES or dependencies.
Mr.. Hills assertion that the bred Scott de-
cisions statement-"there is no power given by
'the Constitution to establish or maintain colo
'nies"-is recognized part of the settled law
of the United States, accepted as such by the
Supreme Court is not accurate. The bred
Scott case is often cited by judges of the pres
ent day, sometimes to agree with and some
times to differ from some position taken in it,
but the Court has never yet affirmed that par
ticular piece of reasoning by which Chief JUS
tice fancy developed his trust for Statehood"
idea. The essential point in the decision
namely, that the constitutional protection of
private property was infringed by laws regu-
lating the place and condition of its enjoyment,
such as forbidding the introduction of slaves
into free territory-is not now settled law.
And this is not because the negro has been re-
moved from the property list by the amendment
of the Constitution, but because the point itself
is an open one and comes up from time to time
with regard to other property Much less is
there binding force in a mere dictum about
colonies, made to buttress the doctrine that
slavery is the natural rule for States and must
be left to grow up within the borders of
future ones. That dictum had no necessary
part in the argument of the main point on
which the decision turned, but was a mere
aside, and Mr.. Hill might as we'll quote at
random any sentence from any Supreme Court
report regardless of its context and call it the
law of the land.
1t is not contended that there are no lmita-
tons on the power of Congress in the Terri
tories. Congress is limited by the spirit of it's
own being by the essential freedom of Anglo
Saxon law, wherever it acts. As Justice Brad
ley in the Mormon Church case puts it: Doubt
less Congress in legislating for the Terri
tories would be subject to those fundamental
Limitations in favor of personal rights which
"are formulated in the Constitution and its
amendments; but these limitations would ex-
| list rather by inference and the general spirit
'of the Constitution from which Congress de-
''rives all its powers than by any other ex-
press and direct application of its provisions"
That is the Republican doctrine. Mr.. Hill
thinks il monstrOus and trembes lest the citi-
zen of NewYork 1ourneying into Territory
should be denied the writ Of habeas corpus or
trial by jury or otherwise tyrannized over Too
bad. It is pity Mr.. Hill was not alive TO tell
his fears TO Thomas Jefferson when he went
even further thar the Mormon Church opinion
and denied TO the inhabitants of New-Orleans
the trial by jury which Mr.. Hill says is guar
anteed TO them by the Constitution or any
doctrine of that instrument. which is not mon
strous. It Is pity he was not in the Cabinet
Of James Monroe TO overrule the approval then
given by John Quincy Adams and John c. Cal
houn TO that great Democrat Andrew Jackson
when he defed a United States district Judge
and refused to obey a writ of habeas corpus
when Governor of the Territory of Florida
What awful tyrants Jefferson and Jackson
were! How fortunate that before they utterly
wrecked our liberties David B. Hill arose TO
give us the true construction of the Constitu-
ton!