Year: 1869

than from myself.
But allow me to say that the Sen1
tor revives an old and familiar ques
ton, an old customer in this Chamber;
it is the question of State rights under
: another alias; it is that question whose
agitation has been felt in the councils


of this country from the first days OF
the Republic down to this moment
and / am sorry, allow me to say, that


it should be introduced on this occa-


sion. Sir, there is nothing in this bill


to justify it. The bill proceeds on adj


mitted princi Piles of constitutional law,


principles which believe the Senator


himself, if he will give his attention to


this great question, will not dispute.


Mr.. THURMAN. Mr.. President,


the Senator from Massachusetts, has


very truly said tnat am new mem


Der of this body; and he might have


said with my entire concurrence that


no member of the Senate needs in


struetion in his duties more than do,


and that no one is willing to receive


instruction with more respect from any


member of the Senate than I am from


the experienced Senator from Massa-
| chusetts. But there are some things,


Mr.. President, that 1,ovis homo as am


l think understand; and think that


among them is this: that q motion to


refer this bill to the Committee on the


Judiciary manifests no disrespect to


the Committee on Foreign Relations.
If am not mistaken there are, or


have been since I have been member


of the Judiciary Committee, several


bills reported by other committees that


were referred to the Committee on the


Judiciary because in the opinion of the


Senate they involved some legal ques-


tions that ought to be considered by


that committee. Indeed, l think it is


very common thing in legislation to


refer bill that has been reported by


one committee to some other commit


tee peculiarly charged with the con-
sidoratien eff some of the subjects that


may be in that bill. For instance, q
bill may be reported upon the policy of


which the Committee on Public Lands,


or on Territories, or on Foreign Rela-


tions would be the proper committee


to report, and at the same time it


might well contain provisions which


would make it proper to refer that bill


to the Committee on the Judiciary


At all events, whether am right in


this or not, l think such has been the


practice and one thing is certain, that
in making that action the furthest


thing in the world from my thoughts


was to treat the Committee on Foreign
Relations with anything short of re-
spcct. ...3... -5.-


The Senator from Massachusetts,


takes exception to my referring to the
opinion of a lawyer who is not mem
Der of this body. He said that if the
lawyer was a member of this body,
even as humble as myself, for he was
kind enough to say that he would lis
ten to my opinion with respect, he
would regard the opinion of that law
yer as worthy of his consideration
Now submit, Mr.. President, that the
opinion of a lawyer is worth neither
more nor less because he is a member
of this body. The Senator would not
hesitate to consider the opinion of AL
exander Hamilton ON constitutional
question, though Mr.. Hamilton never
was member of the Senate of the |
United States. He would not hesi-
tate to refer to Story on the Constitu- |
tion, or to Kent's Commentaries, or to |
Bawle on the Constitution, although I
neither of those authors was ever a
of the Senate of the United |
States. 1 take it he would not hesi-
tate to refer to the opinion of any of
the courts of the States or of the
courts of the United States because
their members were not members and
never had been members of the Sen
ate of the United States. 1 do not
this limitation which the
Senator would impose upon the Sen
ate in considering the opinions Of law
vers upon legal questions. 1t matters
lot to me whether lawyer is men,
DER of the Senate or not; it is sufficient
hat he is lawyer, that he is n man
Who studied the law, that he is man
If ability, of character, of response
,ility and 1 do notearewhether heis
member of the Senate or not, his opin-
on is one that at least puts me on in
Iuiry if it do not command my resp5c>.
But the Senator from Massachusetts
ees in the Suggestion that I made an
pparition which seems always to ex-
ite in his mind something of alarm - !
he apparition of State rights. I do
ot know why it is, but the Senator
rom old Massachusetts, has been en-


aged so earnestly, and so affectually,
90, in putting down some of the enor- :
nous doctrines of State rights that he
Gems to have come into a habit of
lind which makes it impossible for


i'm to believe that a State has any a
lights at all. I submit to his better v
ldgement that even upon any theory
the Constitution the States have
ONE rights, and that they, can be allu- t
ed to in the Senate without emitting t
i'm who alludes to them to any charge
f reviving the ghost of secession,
1uch less the reality of civil war. 4


But the Senator says that this is v
plain thing under the power
D regulate commerce that we have /
bsolute control over this matter. /
" -