FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526   527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535   536   537   538  
539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563   >>   >|  
ace-offering, to appease the lust of power and the ravenings of state encroachment! A "_compromise_," forsooth! that sinks the general government on _its own territory_ into a mere colony, with Virginia and Maryland for its "mother country!" It is refreshing to turn from these shallow, distorted constructions and servile cringings, to the high bearing of other southern men in other times; men, who in their character of legislators and lawyers, disdained to accommodate their interpretations of constitutions and charters to geographical lines, or to bend them to the purposes of a political canvass. In the celebrated case of Cohens vs. the State of Virginia, Hon. William Pinkney, late of Baltimore, and Hon. Walter Jones, of Washington city, with other eminent constitutional lawyers, prepared an elaborate written opinion, from which the following is an extract: "Nor is there any danger to be apprehended from allowing to Congressional legislation with regard to the District of Columbia, its FULLEST EFFECT. Congress is responsible to the States, and to the people for that legislation. It is in truth the legislation of the states over a district placed under their control for _their own benefit_, not for that of the District, except as the prosperity of the District is involved, and necessary to the _general advantage_."--[Life of Pinkney, p. 612.] The profound legal opinion, from which this is an extract, was elaborated at great length many years since, by a number of the most distinguished lawyers in the United States, whose signatures are appended to it. It is specific and to the point. It asserts, 1st, that Congressional legislation over the District, is "the legislation of the _States_ and the _people_," (not of _two_ states, and a mere _fraction_ of the people.) 2d, "Over a District placed under _their_ control," i.e. under the control of the _whole_ of the States, not under the control of _two twenty-sixths_ of them. 3d, That it was thus put under their control "_for_ THEIR OWN _benefit_," the benefit of _all_ the States _equally_; not to secure special benefits to Maryland and Virginia, (or what it might be _conjectured_ they would regard as benefits.) 4th, It concludes by asserting that the design of this exclusive control of Congress over the District was "not for the benefit of the _District_," except as that is _connected_ with, and _a means of promoting_ the _general_ advantage. If this is the case with the _Dis
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   514   515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526   527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535   536   537   538  
539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556   557   558   559   560   561   562   563   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
District
 

control

 

legislation

 

States

 

benefit

 

Virginia

 
general
 

people

 

lawyers

 

regard


Congress

 

states

 

Congressional

 

advantage

 

opinion

 

extract

 

Pinkney

 

benefits

 

Maryland

 
equally

involved
 
secure
 
special
 

profound

 

prosperity

 
connected
 

exclusive

 
promoting
 

design

 
asserting

conjectured

 
concludes
 
specific
 

asserts

 
sixths
 
appended
 

twenty

 
fraction
 

signatures

 

length


United

 
distinguished
 

number

 

elaborated

 

constructions

 

servile

 
cringings
 
distorted
 

shallow

 
refreshing