•^., ^V .v^' ^■ ■<"^ V - ' • a o vP^ c^ % :n .vi>^: :/■/ >i>J W^' V -'-J ■ .0 " " ° " O ^^^^ «-e^' '-^^.■^'l DEMOCRACY VINDICATED AND DORRISM UNVEILED. .0/ hY DEXTER RANDALL. PROVIDENCE; PRINTED BY H. H. BROWN. iS46. DEMOCRACY VINDICATED AND DOimiSM UNVEILED. »' Oh ! Sir, to wilful men, The injuries that they upon themselves procure, Must be their schoolmasters." TO THE LEGITIMATE DEMOCRACY of RHODE-ISLAND Fellow-Citizens, The peculiar aiid unsettled condition of our political affairs, result- ing from an indulgence of the fatal errors, and the prosecution of the ill-advised measures, which have for the last few years, and still con- tinue to interrupt private and public tranquillity — has induced me to address, once more, my Fellow-Citizens, and especially the legi- timate Democracy, with whom I have so long labored in the noble struggle of sustaining true Republican principles. My apology for this, will be found in an earnest desire to correct, by unveiling the source of those errors, and exposing the fallacies of those measures, and to enable all to shun and avoid the dangerous and pernicious consequences of similar ones, in the future. No one of ordinary observation can escape from the ap- palling spectacle, which everywhere meets the view, of opposite FACTIONS, coalescing together — each seeking to circumvent the other — SOCIETIES rent, by political sch'isms and excited feel- ings — PUBLIC OPINION diseased, by the contagions of new heresies — interchanges of social and Christian charities para- lized — CURRENTS of justice in our judicial forums and trials hy juries swayed by partisan prejudices and discipline — apostacy invited and rewarded — old friends denounced — new ones idolized — CLIQUES, of despicable tendencies, predominant — incompetent par- TizANs promoted — insubordination encouraged and patronized — MAN-WORSHIP substituted for principles — " ancient land- marks" of parties obliterated — Public Presses subsidized and de- graded. These, Fellow-Citizens, are some of the deplorable re- sults entailed upon our community, by the prosecution of measures alike incompatible with the civil institutions, and forbidden by the laws and constitution of our common country. Nor is it less to be regretted, that unscrupulous demagogues and EAGER aspirants to distinction, instead of directing their ef- forts to reform such abuses, and to check their pernicious influences. hare craftily availed themselves of these unhealthy and feverish' ex- citements, to achieve the selfish objects of their ambitious aspira- tions. This developement oi' indulged caprices and licensed pcrjidies of frail humaniUj, but too strongly proves the existence of those easy virtues, which are ever found too feeble to restrain men from abjuring principles they formerly cherished — and embracing to-day political and opposite sects, they yesterday abhorred and despised ! ! ! From the prevalence of such devastating influences, factions of extraordinary contrarieties, have grown up in our State — assumed the name, without its principles, and prostituted DEMOCRACY to purposes it never recognized, and which it reprobates and discards. It becomes necessary, therefore, to distinguish these purposes from legitimate Democracy. This distinction deserves candid attention and careful scrutiny. I invite both, that if found erroneous, it may be corrected. My object and aim will be to vindicate the one, and to expose the fallacies and dangers of the other. The natural dis- tinction, and for clearness I adopt it, presents unadulterated de- mocracy on the one hand — and that isolated and strange anom- aly, in our Republican system of government, christened DORR- I3M, on the other. These differ as Christianity and Paganism. DISTINCTION. DEMOCRACY reveres and obeys Constitutional enactments. For redress of political wrongs, IT resorts to the consti|uted au- thorities — failing there — to rea- son and to the Ballot Box. To accomplish its purposes, IT ENFORCES PEACEABLE and AVOIDS FORCIBLE MEASURES. IT RECOGNIZES measurcs, not men. DORRISM rejects and diso- beys them. IT CONTEMNS " constituted au- thorities," RESORTS to the pas- sions of the Masses — avoids the Ballot Box, until compelled to accept it. It invites, employs and en- forces FORCIBLE, and obstinately avoids PEACEABLE MEASURES. IT WORSHIPS 3IEN DISCARDS MEASURES. By not attending to this distinction, and the evidences on which it rests, fallacious a?id erroneous opinions, both at home and abroad, have been imbibed, fostered and extensively circulated by ambitious men, seeking to promote their own aggrandizement, that DEMOC- RACY and DORRISM are synonimous and inseparable. A great- er or more mistaken opinion never prevailed on any subject. Tried by the laws and constitution of the nation — weighed in the scale of the solemn and reciprocal duties and obligations, existing between State Governments, and the National Government — and the restrictions imposed upon State sovereignty by that Instrument, DORRISM will be found to be a defenceless mass of absurdities and CRIME. It is time some effort was made to correct these opinions, to res- tore a healthful consideration, and to dissipate the factitious delusions they perpetuate. So long as they exist, designing men, for want of individual merit, will make them the pretexts of action, for their own elevation, irrespective of public tranquillity. I am aware that any effort of mine, will be deemed by the preju- diced and deluded victims of these opinions — vain and idle, and be Hltributed to sinister motives. So deeply rooted are the prejudices and obstinate tendencies of such, that reason and argument with them, have but little if any influence. By an improper use, " pearls" are spoiled ! Tlic :ipi)robation of such is not expected, their cen- sures not regarded ! The approval of the moderate and judicious portion of my fellow-citizens is alone valuable. When therefore the fads, circumstances and reasons applicable to the Mr, A\s, COURSE and measures adopted and pursued in 1842, to " establish and carry into effect," the People's Constitution, and Government organized under it are stated, candidly and dispassion- ately considered, I am persuaded these erroneous opinions will yield to the "sober second thought," and patriotic consideration with utter astonishment that they have ever been indulged. It is essential to a rightful understanding of those measures, and of the true character of Anomalous Dorrism, to recur summarily to the events anterior to that period. ORIGIN OF THE SUFFRAGE PARTY— DORRISM UNKNOWN. DEMOCRACY ACQUIESCES. In 1840-41, a numerous body of citizens, composed chiefly of non- freeholders, organized a Suffrage Association, whose objects w^ere an enlargement o{ the right of Suffrage — an equality of representa- tion, and the institution of a Constitutional Government, to secure more effectually these rights, and to define and limit its legislative powers. The earlier movements of this Association, were characterized with moderation, great caution and prudence . The idea of resort- ing to violent and /ort/iZe measures, was never entertained, nor were political sects countenanced, (See Newport Resolutions.) The Democratic Party approving the objects avowed in this Association, generally gave them their aid and support. By this aid, the propo- sed plan of reform became extensively popular. Thomas W. Dorr, in the early stages and during the incipient progress of these events, was not known ; even considered unfavora- bly inclined towards them. He belonged to none, and was then a discarded member of the old Federal party. Not until a late period when popular opinion strongly favored the objects of the Association was he admitted to jiarticipate in them at all. The lamentable re- sults which followed, but too plainly show, it would have been far more fortunate for all concerned, and for the tranquillity of the State, if he had never been suffered to mingle in their councils and to direct their acts. A Convention of the People was finally called, by the Association and its friends, a constitution formed and claimed to be adopted by a majority of the adult males of the State, in manner therein provi- ded. In the formation of that instrument, it is true he assisted, but was far less distinguished than many other prominent individuals of the convention. This is shown by the fact, that three other gentle- men were successively elected and put in nomination as candidates for the Chief Magistracy, all of whom declined. From necessity rather than choice, he became the fourth selection of the Convention. Indeed he manifested no little displeasure, that he was not the first selected, and adrohly maneuvered to procure the 6 declination of Gen. Carpenter, the first candidate selected, who was not a member, on the pretext that Whig Suffrage men could not be prevailed upon to support a democrat. Such were the circum- stances under which he became the candidate for the Chief Magis- tracy. The limit of his popularity is also shown by the fact, that although unopposed, he received only about half tlie number of votes given for the Constitution ! Up to this period, it will be seen that, such a strange anomaly in our civil institutions, as DORRISM, was unknown, and had no existence whatever. ITS ORIGIN. After the Convention, and his nomination, its premonitory symp- toms began to develope themselves. The assemblages of the masses assumed a more threatening character, and their resolutions breath- ed a higher tone of action. Forcible measures were openly intimated and boldly recommended, in case the Charter Government should re- sist the establishment of the Constitution & government to be formed under it. Intemperate harangues, addressed to their passions, were ut- tered by the new batch of liberty orators, the crisis produced. Any and all resistance was defied and menaced with physical punish- ment. Heated appeals and passionate allusions to the examples of patriotic valor of our ancestors, in the early stages of the revolution, were freely indulged, to excite and kindle a warlike fervor. To these, succeeded military preparations and organized arm- ed forces. These unequivocal acts approved and encouraged by him, entirely changed the peaceable measures by which the Suffrage and Democratic parties sought to accomplish their purposes. They in- duced reflection, and converted friends to the cause, into opposers of the measures pursued to sustain it. At tliis crisis, the Charter Government becoming alarmed at this new aspect of the Suffrage Party, with the intention of checking these violent proceedings and preventing an election of officers un- der the Constitution, passed the famous act, familiarly called the " Alger ine Law." It failed in its objects. An election notwith- standing, in which the Democracy and myself participated, was had, which resulted in a choice of Dorr for Governor. At the inauguration, a military escort, in warlike costume, and of an imposing aspect, appeared, and actually supervised with arms and munitions of war in their hands, the organization of the new Gov- ernment. These unusual displays, attended with expressions of dire- ful intent, were but the shadowing forth of ulterior results. Inaugurated and qualified, as Commander in Chief, he usurped su- preme control, advised and directed all subsequent acts of a hostile nature,upon his own responsibility, as will be seen hereafter. Coun- tenanced by a few misguided devotees, he erroneously claimed the HIGH TREROGATIVE OF RIGHT, TO ESTABLISH THE CONSTITUTION IN FACT, AND TO PROTECT THE GOVERNMENT BY FORCE ! This unwarranted assertion of right, and its indefensible subse- quent execution, were the fatal errors which overturned and pros- trated both. Errors, in which he obstinately persists, and which his pretended admirers for selfish purposes, and their imported orators from sister states, my friends Hallet, Wright, Rantoul and others, have inconsiderately sustained and enforced, in strains of impassioned eloquence. This was the origin of Dorrism. THE COURSE DEMOCRACY ADVISED. We of the Democratic party, believing in tlie soundness of tli(* JDemocratic principle, that the People, in their original inherent sov- ereignty, have the uncontrollable right to form and adopt a Repub- lican form of Government — urged him to dispense with all forcible jneans— to adopt the course and appeal to that Tribunal designated by the Constitution of the United States. While we cherished and sustained this right, we denied and still deny the prerogative ; Dorr assumed to establish his Government by a resort to force. We thought and still think, the course and authority he ought to have pursued, and resorted to, is contained in Art. 4, Sec. 4 of that in- strument. — viz : " The United States Shall guarantee to each State in this Union, a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each one of them against invasion ; and on application of the Legislature, or of the Executive, (when the Legislature cannot be convened,) against domestic violence." These powers arrest Dorrism upon the threshold, and 7)iakc it an HIGH OFFENCE. Whocvcr wish to review the errors they have so long indulged, are respectfully requested to consider candidly a few of the reasons for our opinions, which I have space only to state. NEW POWERS. Reason I. The National Constitution created a new Union of the original States — anew National Government — and superceded those under the Confederation. It clothed if self with new powers, suffi- cient to enforce its own authority, and to compel obedience to its own laws, which the old government was found incapable of doing, from the want of necessary powers. In this section, the "guaran- tee" and ruoTECTioN " against domestic violence," are new powers, each capable of enforcing its own authority, and of compelling obe- dience. The second, " against invasion," is substantially the same as that in Article 3d of the Confederation. HOW EXECUTED. Reason 2. The difference of the ^roof, or events, on which their execution depends, is of the utmost importance to a rightful under- standing of the obligations, these powers impose upon the United States, and of the obligations and restrictions they impose upon each State. On an " invasion," the interposition of the " United States" becomes obligatory upon the fact itself As under the confederation, it means a foreign " force offered to, or attacks made upon" a State, of which the Government is deemed to have notice. The execution of the "guarantee" depends u\)on an application of memorial to the U. States, of a party-state government, while in be- inor of one of the oricrinal States, askino- them to establish or guarantee the Republican Constitution and Government she has formed and adopted, as anew State is obliged to memorialize and apply to Con- gress under another grant. " Congress may admit new States into the Union ;" Hence every admission is a legislative execution of the " guarantee" of a Republican Government to the State admitted. The execution of the power to " protect against domestic violence" depends also upon an application of a party State, and upon the spe- cific mode of proof of the existence of violence, prescribed in this 8 section. While the guarantee upon such an application may be ex' ecuted or refused by Congress, as it may adjudicate, yet upon siich an application and proof, for protection from violence, to the Exec- utive of the Union, he can neither adjudicate, hesitate, nor refuse protection. The obligation of the National Government, as in a case of n?yas/oH, then becomes peremptory. His own obligation to de- fend the Constitution and to enforce the laws, especially of 1795 and of 1807, passed in pursuance of another grant specially to Congress, " to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws, to sup- press insurrections and repel invasions," as well as his oath of office, leave him no alternative : he must interpose ( the energies of the United States to suppress and protect against it. DESIGN OF THE GUARANTEE. Reason 3. A central and supervisory government had just been erected upon a Republican platform. The Charter, government of each State was then exercising legislative functions, by no authority, other than by the sufferance or acquiescence of the people. The rea- son for this grant cannot be mistaken. Its design was,;to institute and preserve a symmetry of governments in all the States, and be- tween them and the central government, and to enforce uniformity oi Republican institutions in all, and to compel the obedience and acquiescence of each and all. It is the ke}/-litik in the chain of our Union, and preserves the whole fabric from disruption. Impair and destroy it, and the supervising power of the National Government over this uniformity and obedience, is annihilated. There is no check upon them — no power to compel their acquiescence. Licen- tiousness and insubordination will soon absorb regulated freedom. EVENT CONTEMPLATED. Reason 4. It applied only to the original States that conferred it, leaving its execution also to be enforced in the admission of new States. The event contemplated by this grant, and on which its prospective execution was to attach, under the then condition of the Colonies or States, was and is; a controversy between two opposing Gov- ernments IN ONE of the original StATES, EACH CLAIMING AND asserting lawful AND RIGHT^'^UL SUPREMACY. An EVENT, the wisdom of the Convention foresaw, was probable to occur, on the States' forming and substituting Republican, in the stead of their old Charter governments, which they had so long permitted and suffered to exercise legislative functions. In other words, when the people of an original State, in the exercise of their reserved sovereignty, with or without permission, should have formed a Republican gov- ernment, and the Colonial or CZ/or^fr Legislature should oppose and resist its establishment. The precise event R-hode-Island presented in 1842 ! ! She is an original State, and since the 4th of .luly, 1776, her colo- nial government has been preserved alone by the sufferance and ac- quiescence of her people ! It is not pretended, that the people, at any time since Nov. 24, 1G63, have ever " gathered together" — re-opened the " lirccious box" that still contains its remains (except to celebrate its funeral ceremonies. May 3, 1843) and renewed their ratification of it. No "George Baxter" has ever unfurled its "Majesty's stamp and broad seal," and " with much becoming gravity," be- " ri:ad'^ the " gracious letters patent," and " presented them to the perfect vl^w of the people," for their re-adoption ! She was the nourished child, the licensed Legislature, that " brccithed, moved and had its being," bj the sufferance and acquiescence of the people, possessing no power to be asked, or if asked, none to grant permis- sion ! With all its faults, I would welcome the old Charter again into existence ! ! ! Though last to accede to the Union and consummate this power, yielded by all the other States, by her ratification of the Constitution in 1790, she was the first and only State, in which the contemplated event, demanding the execution of the guarantee, ever occurred ! OBLIGATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS. Reason 5. The grants of these new powers impose obligations and duties upon the U. S. which they cannot disregard or neglect — duties and obligations to the U. S. and restrictions and prohibitions upon the States, which they are not at liberty to o/nit, transgress nor disregard, without violating the Constitution they have established. The duties and object of the " Guarantee," compel its execution to an original State, when a proper subject and proper application to the proper department of the Government on which its execution de volves — are presented and made. What is this department? THE LEGISLATIVE, NOT THK JUDICIAL POWER. Reason 6. An opinion entitled to great respect prevails, that the execution of this grant belongs to the judicial power, either solely or concurrently with Congress, or the Legislative power. I do not so understand it. Being in its nature, a political and not a judicial power, and being a General Grant to the United States — its execu- tion to one of the original States, must necessarily devolve on Con- gress, among other General Grants, not otherwise assigned to any one department, or officer of the Government, by Art. 1, Sec. 1 — "All Legislative powers herein granted, shall be vested in the Congress of the Uiiited States." This construction is strengthened by the fact, that it is not otherwise assigned, and by the great reason for the Grant itself. Its immense magnitude, required a depository of efficient capabil- ity to execute it, otherwise it would prove ineffectual. Its execution necessarily implies, (if need be) the exertion of the whole physical energies of the entire Union. The legislative power alone com- mands and exerts the energies of the Nation. It was left among the General Grants, to be exercised and executed by Congress alone. — It cannot be, that its execution devolves upon the judicial depart- ment solely. For although the judiciary may adjudicate upon the abstract right, or on subjects resulting therefrom, they cannot com- mand the energies to enforce their decision, without the intervention of Congress. Nor can it safely depend upon a concurrent jurisdic- tion of the Legislative and judicial powers. For then, the Grant might be rendered imoperative and ineffectual by a conflict of opin- ion between them. The judicial powers are specifically defined, and their jurisdiction is restricted to the subjects enumerated in the Con- stitution. A controversy between opposing Governments of a State, for su- PREMAcy or any other object, is not an enumerated subject assigned 2 10 to the judicial department, and, therefore, not within its juris- diction. The nearest approach to it, is, a controversy " arising in law or equity between two or more States." This falls far short of the event that occurred in Rhode Island. That was a political con- troversy, strictly between opposite parties of citizens of the State, which the Constitution excludes from the judicial, and assigns to the legislative power. Congress then is the department, the tribunal, the umtire, on which the exercise and execution of tiiis Grant, and an adjudication upon the occurred cvc?it and all its attendant incidents devolves. — Unless Congress be this department, there is none provided, by which the Grant can be executed. It is a "casus omissus." This cannot be admitted, for there is no Grant in the Constitution inoperative, ineffectual, obsolete or useless. The Guarantee is operative and cjfrctual. It reaches and embraces the event and controversy origi- nally contemplated. It is settled judicially that the Grants can be exercised only by the department, or officer of Government to which they are distributed and assigned by the Constitution. The execu- tion of this power, then, appears to me, to devolve alone on Congress, among the legislative powers. THE PROPER SUBJECT. Reason 7. The object or subject on which the execution of the guar- antee attaches, is an existing Constitution and Government, "repub- lican in form" adopted and organized by the people of an original State. ITS EXECUTION CONCLUDES ALL QUESTIONS. ReasoiX 8. Its execution, like admission, settles and concludes all prior and preliminary questions, before it can be executed or re- fused. The manner of forming and adopting a Constitution ; — of orga- nizing a Government — its form, powers and character — the mode of application — the capacity of the applicants, nuist first be settled, determined and concluded by Congress, tb.e highest and only con- stituted authority, on whicli, such determination and its execution or refusal devolves in the last resort. NEGATIVE AND AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION. Reason 9. A controversy between opposing Governments of a State, presupposes a prior existing Government, and another, at- tempting to supercede it. Especially is this the case in an original State. Upon such a controversy, then, an adjudication by Congress may be negative to one or both — affirmative to one only. The guar- antee may be refused to one or both, but can be executed to one on- ly. Take the Rhode Island Controversy for illustration : Upon an application to Congress, of both the Charter and People'.? Government, while in being, an adjudicalion thai neither was republi- can in form however adopted — the guarantee must have been refused to both. So upon application of either alone — a decision that the People's was properly adopted and republican, and the Charter not. Congress must have guaranteed it, for the plain reason that it had su- perceded the Charter — not for the abhorrent reason assigned by Mr. Burke, upon an improper application, that when a Constitution, 11 *• which exists in the consent of the people, and over which tliey have control, is not of a republican form — it is the duty of Congress to set it aside and to recognize and nifurcc mie that is ! ! ! " Such a doctrine is a solecism even in the wildest vagaries of Dorrism itself. For an adjudication that the People's was not properly adopted, would have made it waste paper removed the event, for which a guar- antee was asked, and left the Charter, recognized by the Constitution in the consent and control of the people as before, over which Con- gress have nothing to do, much less the duty to set it aside ! ! ! So in a case, which can scarcely ever happen, where, both claimant Governments are adjudged republican in form, the latter is to he preferred, because it is the last act of the sovereign people over the subject, and therefore supercedes the prior Constitution. The obligation on Congress to execute the guarantee to an origi- nal State, is" much stronger than to "admit a State." In the former, it "shall guarantee," in the latter, it "may admit." The effects of the two powers when executed, are coeval with each other, on the subjects, to which they respectively apply, and thus the symmetry and uniformity of State Government, are preserved and enforced in all. Applications of an old or new State are therefore founded upon a State Government existant, asking for the guarantee, or admission, and the execution of both powers or either of them, embraces and concludes all incidental and pi-eliininari/ questions, arising out of the waif, mode and manner of its formation, adoption and organization. PRECEDENTS AND PRACTICE. Reaso.v 10, Tennessee, 31ichigan and Arkansas are adjudicated precedents, and illustrate some of the preceding positions. The people of these States, while Territories, and subject to the ordi- nances of Congress, in the exercise of their sovereign rights, without regard to those ordinances, met in Conventions, formed and adopted Constitutions and governments, and in their capacities of State gov- ernments, applied for admission. It was objected, especially to Michigan, that their preliminary proceedings were had " without the consent," and against the " or- dinances of Congress," and were therefore " unauthorized and void." The triumphant and sustained reply Vv-as, " that the sovereign right of the people of a State or Territory, having the requisite popu- lation, to meet, form and adopt constitutional governments, was not " controlled by, or made dependant upon, the consent of Congress ;" •' otherwise Congress, by withholding its consent, could perpetually prevent the admission of new States into the Union." On admitting Michigan, Col. Benton, whose great experience in our civil institu- tions well defined popular State sovereignty, and said — " That Conventions were original acts of the people : They de- pended upon inherent and inalienable rights. The people of any State may at any time meet in Convention, without a law of their Legislature, and without any provision, or against any provision in their Constitution, and may alter or abolish the whole form of their governments, as they please." This doctrine is perfectly consistent with sovereignty, over any mode for amendment in a Constitution. The power to abolish the 12 greater instrument most assuredly can abolish any subordinate pro- vision. There is no terror in this, when once examined. Those States were admitted. Their admission settled the right of their proceedings, even in opposition to the ordinances of Con- gress ; and all questions as conditions precedent to their admission. THE RIGHT TO FORM STATE GOVERNMENTS. Reason 11. The right of the people of a State or Territory, or a clearly ascertained majority of them, to meet in Convention, to alter, institute and adopt, for, and by themselves, with or without the con- sent of their legislatures, or any other power, when and how they choose, is unrestricted and controllable by no authority, except that which they have imposed "over themselves and the subject matter," by their adoption of the National Constitution. This right is the necessary and positive result, from "their inherent and original sovereignty" first created and conferred upon them, by the Declaration of Independence. Upon this sovereign right, to this extent, there is no restriction whatever. It was left to the States, un- impaired, and extended prospectively to the people of new States by the Constitution itself A moment's reflection and a glance at the rapidity of resistance of the Colonies, prove the great value of this arrangement, and powerfully evinces the intention of the framers of that Instrument. PROOF. The people of this continent, ow ing and acknowledging nllegi- ance to the realm of Great Britain, were created and incorporated into distinct Colonies or States, by Charters from the Crown , with certain restrictions and limitations upon them as "Sovereigns.'''' In their corporate capacities, wiiiie permitted "to enact laws," befitting their "good and welfare,'* they could "ordain no law, no ordinance," nor " use, exercise, or put into execution,''' any "forms and ceremonies of Goveijuncnt nud Magistracy'^ contrary and repug- nant "to our Realm of England.'''' In this dependant situation they remained down to 1765, when the stamp act produced the first act of resistance to British authority. Virginia taking the lead — In June, Massachusetts proposed a "Colonial Congress to consult for the general safety." In October following. Delegates from nine States met, which was the first general meeting of the Colonies for any purpose, adopted a declaration against the Stomp Act, and ex- pressed their continued allegiance to the Crown. In 1769 an event occurred; which gave new impulses to resistance, and awakened new aspirations for independence. An order was sent to the Governor of Massachusetts, requiring all suspected of " Treason to be sent home and tried." In tlie progress of conflicts that ensued, meas- ures were matured to call a " Continental Congress.'" This body, consisting of delegates from eleven States, held its first session, Sept. 4th, 1774. On May 10th 1776 a second Congress was hold- en. " Independence had been broached among the People." — On the 8th of June, IMr. Lee moved, "to declare America, free and in- dependent," and July 4th consummated the deed. This noble act abrupted all allegiance to the Crown— annulled their Charter governments—abrogated all restrictions, and THREW 13 BACK the people upon tlieir inherent rights as ORIGINAL SOVE- IIEIGNS, not controllableby nuy authority whatever. The Charter Legislatures henceforward, existed only by the suffer- ance of their sovereigns, the people. They possessed no power which they could exert themselves, much le^s any poiver to delegate to others. Instead of their possessing any right or power to permit the people to act — the people permitted them to exercise the func- tions of legislation. 'The people of each State, then, of and by themselves — with or without consent of their legislatures, were sovereign over both rights, to adopt "such forms and ceremonies of Government and Magistracy," as they chose, and to exert such means and resources to " put them into execution, os they pleased^ Nay — they could com- pel the consent and acquiescence of their Legislatures. The fact that they suffered and permitted their Legislatures to exist and exer- cise legislative functions, is plenary proof of their uncontrollable sovereignty. Let us trace these rights, then, and see when the peo- ple relinquished the latter. From this pericfd, they assumed a new national character. November 17, 1777, second year of Indeq^endcnce, the Continen- tal Congress proposed a new compact of Union, the Confedera- tion, which was ratified July 9, 1778, third year. By this new compact, the people, as sovereigns, through their legislative agents, still dependant upon their will, yielded and granted to Congress, cer- tain attributes of their sovereignty, and retained to themselves the residue. Among those retained, were both absolute rights above. " Art. 2. Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom and inde- pendence, and every power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Con- gress assembled." The people, with their retained sovereignty and rights, over both the forms and ceremonies of government, and the means to put them into execution, and their Legislatures, continued in this independent condition, to September 17, 1787, when, in the ticclfth year of Inde- pendence, they formed another compact of Union, and another gov-- ernment, over themselves, the Constitution. THE RELINQUISHMENT. By this instrument they again loaived and granted to the United States, other and more important attributes of their sovereignty. Of these two absolute rights, they waived the latter, and again re- tained the yb?v«er. While they divided the former, over any forms, — retained and restricted themselves to the single right over a Re- publican form only, they waived all right over their own physical resources to put into execution the one form, when adopted, and in the language of the S. Court of the U. S., " The States in their highest sovereign capacities in the Convention of the people, in a plenitude unimpaired by any act, and controllable by no authority, adopted the Constitution, by which they made to the United States a grant," to "guarantee" — '' put into execution" — to establish for themselves, the one form of government, which they limited and restricted themselves to form and adopt. The sovereign right, bestowed by independence, and retained un- 14 der the ConfederatiDii, to meet, form and adopt the " form and cer- emony of a Republican government, with cr tcithout the consent and permission of their Legislatures — they again retained to themselves nnimpairvd — while they magnanimously relinquished, granted and surrendered the right to use, resort to, and exert, their own phy- sical resources to establish it : This right and their ojcn resources they granted to the United States, and agreed that Congress should exercise it, and use and exert their resources for and over them- selves, whenever their grant of the guarantee should require it. To guard against all misconstruction, and more effectually to se- cure this and other ?-ffa«HPf/ rights from encroachment, they again,- ]\Iarch 4, 17S9, thirteenth year of Independence, hastened to adopt the following declaratory amendment, viz. — " The powers not dele- gated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the peo- ple." Amd. 12. The words " States , respectively" are here used to designate the limits and territorial jurisdictions of each Colony, as in their Char- ters, and in the ^d article of the Confederation. The obvious meaning of the amendment is, the powers not delegat- ed, nor prohibited by the Constitution, are reserved, to the people of the Colonies respectively. But, suppose the word "States" is used in contradistinction to " the people." The use of the rights re.'?fyycf/ then, devolve alternately upon "the States," and "the peo- ple." Therefore, when a Charter government should withhold its consent, the alternate use of the rights rescr-vcd, devolve upon the people, and become executory by them without sucJi consent. This right, therefore, the people of each State still retain, and can exercise it, unth or without consent of their Charter Legislature, as they could have done at any period between the Declaration of Lide- pendence and the adoption of the Constitution, with the single ex- ception that they have relinquished their right to^ comper their Leg- islature to acquiesce in it. To have restricted this right, and made its exercise dependent up- on the permission of the Charter Legislatures, therefore, would have revived and imparted to them a power and vigor, which independence had extinguished and annulled. It would have marred the system just created — defeated uniformity of Republican institutions in any or all the States — for, as such consent might be withheld by a Colo- nial Legislature, the adoption of Republican governments might have been perpetually prevented. It was, therefore, left unrestricted by the Constitution!* ''Upon the Act nailing a Convention in my address December 22, lt?42, I held the sanip doctrine, viz : Its (the act) langinige is, that the Freemen be, and they are hereby re- ^"^.^'•^d to choose delegates. Here is no authority asserted — none claimed. Ihis request could iiave no greater force, than a similar one by any other equal number of citizens. All Conventions originate in the same way — unless some positive mode is prescribed by a paramount or sovereign power. In such cases, a Convention IS only a body, with delegated or limited authority, and can act only in accord- ance with the will of its creator. J\ot so Willi a Convention originating by a more request from a body of men possessing themselves no authority to call it, and no power to delegate to it. 16 STATE SOVEREIGNTY. Reason' 12. The sovereignty of the people, over a State govern- ment differs from that of the people of the United States over the National government. The latter is uncontrollable and absolute. They can at any time, annul — institute another, and put it into exe- cution by their own resources, as they please. Stati:; sovereigxtv, under tlie National Constitution, is limited and restricted to the single right to form and adopt, a Republican government only, and interdicted from resorting to its own resources. This is the terminus of State sovereignty over that subject matter. INTERDICTION. Reason 13. The grant of the guarantee to the United States, then, while it tolerates State sovereignty to this extent, and obligates each original State, in such a controversy, " to come" to Cono-ress, to settle and establish for her, a Republican government — here inter- poses — prohibits — forbids and interdicts her, to resort to any other course, or to use, or attempt to use any other resourees or means to put it into execution, on penalty of the intervention of the o-overn- ment, and the punishment it inHicts. This right each State has not only waived, alienated, and devested herself of, by her grant of it to the United States, but has transferred and granted her own physical resources, to be used by the Executive of the Union, upon his requi- sition, to suppress and protect each of the other States against vio- lence and insurrections. Otherwise the national guarantees are useless and inoperative ! THE COURSE ENJOINED. Reaso.v 14. On the adoption of a Constitution, and the oro-aniza- tion of a government under it, in an original State, then, while both are in being, " a committee appointed to transmit the Constitution," the organization, and all the proceedings in relation to them, to Con- gress — like a new State for admission — and by '• memorial in be- half of the people of the State — to ask in their name, " the recoo-- nition of the Constitution," and guarantee of it to the States. — (See forms and practice of new States.) Such is the duty of an original State, and the mode of application to Congress, the legitimate and only authority, which each State, for herself, has erected and agreed, by her grant of the guarantee, should establish the government so formed, and settle all controversy arisino- between it, and an opposing government. The grant itself bestowed upon Congress (U. States) the exclusive exercise of this right, and the power to use, employ and exert the physical resources of each State, to execute the guarantee ; as is shown by the powers vested in the President, " to call forth," in the first instance, ' the militia' of each State, ' to execute the laws and suppress insurrections.' Hence, all mooted questions are finally set- A mere rpquest is of no efficacy whatever, until the people upon whom it is made, signify tiieir assent and co-operation by clioosing delegates to repre- sent them in the proposed Convention. When such a Convention is assembled it assumes an original character and potency — the embodied sovereign will of the people, acting through and by its delegates. The right, therefire, to prescribe and ordain its own forms and rules for its future action, is an allribute of power, coeval and co-existent with their sovereign will." 16 lied and determined by Congress, as conditions precedent to the exe- cution of the guarantee. The duty of a State government so formed, and claiming right" ful authority, then, admonishes to this course; respect for the law and Constitution of the Union, controls its acts, and compels its obedience ; examples and practice direct its judgment ; the penal- ties for offending, check its misguided impetuosity, and p rohibit a resort to any other course. EFFECTS OF ITS OPPOSITE. Reason 15. A resort by a State government, to its own re sources, or any other means, to establish it, makes the resort it- self an offence of no ordinary guilt — rejects constitutional injunc- tions — disobeys constitutional prohibitions — violates the grant and agreement of the guarantee — transcends State sovereignty — pro- vokes and invites, insurrections and insubordination — assumes the powers of the National Government, conferred by the Constitu- tion — and commits ' domestic violence,' in open disobedience of the other grant to protect ! ! ! DORR'S ERROR. Here was the fatal error of my old friend ! against the dangers of which, under the eaves of the foundry, at his inauguration, after my old Democratic friends, Dea. Eben. Barney and several other mem- bers of the Legislature came to my house during the intermission, to obtain my opinion upon his proposal to take the State House by force. I frankly warned him, and advised and urged him to dismiss his military and to appeal to Congress. His reply was taunting and repulsive. " This was not the course he had marked out." He proposed to elect Rejjresenlatives to Congress, and let the House adjudicate their election and rights to sit." To this I replied, " their decision, one way or the other, v/ould settle nothing farther than an expression of opniion of one branch of the Government, within its specific constituliwual power, and would be wholly inojierative, far- ther than a rejection or admission." He left me for liis oilicial du- ties, with a repetition, ' this is not my course.' On the night of the ItSth of May, I left my then country residence, and arrived at An- thony's Head Quarters about ten o'clock, mingled with the soldiery, ascertained an attack on the arsenal was to be made, sought and obtained a short interview with him, in the hope of prevailing with him, and again frankly urged hiin to abandon his forcible measures, commit no violence, as he could neither sustain himself by right or force. At this moment information reached him of an adverse mil- itary movement, when he abruptly mingled among his men, and next morning, for my good intentions toward him, 1 was informed by his surgeon, that he charged me with being a spy. 1 have seen him but once since. Because I have not thought as he thinks, on the great question which he undertook, but preferred Democracy to Dorrism, 1 have incurred all the venom his influence could excite, among his deluded adherents. Be it so, I make no complaint, as their indifterence is much more pleasant than a closer forced intima- cy. PROTECTION. Reason 16. The other grant to protect each State from do- 17 mestie Tiolence, imposes like duties and obligations on the United States, and equally strong duties, obligations and restrictions upoh each State, which neither cart omit, transgress nor disobey, with- out incurring the penalties they inflict. While it compels the national authorities to interpose and af- ford protection, it enjoins upon the people of each State not to commit violence— ^subjects them to the interposition of the nation- ial government, if they do, and visits upon them the penalties of omission and transgression. As the guarantee of a republican government prohibits and interdicts the use of forcible measures, so a resort to them for that purpose, is a wrongful act — a viola- tion of solemn obligations — an omission of the highest duties — a transgression of imposed restrictions, and a provocation for its penalties and intervention. From tlie juxtaposition of these two grants in the Constitution, and the close relation they bear to each other, it is not improbable that this power was inserted to meet a contemplated violence, arisino- from an improper attempt of one party or tlie other, in an original State, to establish a Government by forcible means. At all events, such a result has happened in one of the original States, in violation of all duties, restrictions and obligations, imposed upon herself, by both grants, and Avhich made the interposition of the government necessary to suppress it. In both cases, each State by her own agreement, has confided to Congress and the Executive, the exer- cise and execution of each power, over herself. Upon grants of powers to each department, or officer of the Gov- ernment, and upon restrictions upon the States resulting therefrom, the court is impressive and decisive, viz : " The States, in their higiiest sovereign capacities in the Conven- tion of the people, in a plenitude unimpaired by any act, and con- trollable by no authority ,'''' adopted the Constitution, by which thej made to the U. States a grant of Judicial power, "over controver- sies between two or more States." The States ivaived their exemp- tion from judicial power, as sovereigns by original and inherent right, by their own grant of its exercise, over themselves, in such ca- ses. The Constitution created a new Government, organized it into distinct departments, assigning to each its appropriate powers, and to Congress the power of carrying into execution the powers grant- ed to each, so that the laws of tlie Union could be enforced by it.s own authority^ upon all persons and subject matters, over which ju- risdiction was granted by any department or officer of the Govern- ment of the U. States, , . "to extend the Legislative, Executive and Judicial power, alike over persons and States on the enumerated subjects of the grants. The States submitted to its exercise ; waiv- ed their sovereignty, and agreed to come to this Court, to settle their controversies with each other." — 12 Peters, 730. This decision excludes from the Judicial power, controversies be- tween claimant Governments of a State. The execution of the guarantee devolves, upon the Legislative department. The States as Sovereignshy original right then, waived their right to establish a Government by a resort to their own resources, by their grant to Congress, to exercise it, and to employ their own physi- cal energies " over themselves." Each, and all for each, submitted 3 18 to its exercise — and, as in their grant to the Judicial power, orer " controversies between two or more States," solemnly agreed " to come'^ to Congress, to settle a controversy arising, between opposing governments, in a State, and to guarantee and establish a republican one, " over themselves." As they restricted and interdicted themselves from the right to enforce it, so they obligated themselves not to commit violence in attempting it — and subjected themselves to t!ie intervention of the National Government, for their transgression ! ! ! Concede then, that Dorr's Constitution was righthj adopted, his Government rightly organized, himself, the rightful ch'xei magistrate, yet, under 'popular sovereignty within State hmils,' x\\g prerogative he assumed, to enforce and establish them, by a resort to the physical resources of the State, was an assumption of the powers of the Na- tional Government — an oftence approximating to TREASON against it — an act wholly indefensible — irrespective of tiie constitut- ed Umpire of his country — and violative alike of the immense obli- gations and solemn duties imposed upon him, as the rightful Execu- tive of a State ! ! 1 This alarming and fiital assumption of right, at this enlightened period in our civil and constitutional jurisprudence, so utterly regard- less of the course, ordained by the State, over herself and her con- troversy, — and against all advice, has indeed no palliation — no re- deeming excuse. It can be accounted for only, not justified, by a misconception of the import, and a misapplication to a state of " popular sovereignty," whose seducing charms seem to have be- trayed my old friend, into culpable and frightful excesses. This was tiie course Democracy advised — this the course Dorrism rejected. This course and these reasons will be attested, and those of Dorrism condemned by the facts following. REBUKE OF DEMOCRATS, AND HIS OWN FRIENDS. For advising this course, and refusing to aid him in his ill-advised measures, he still continues to upbraid his friends, and to impugn the '<■ honor and dull/ of Democ.rats." In August last, in reply to the Albany Democratic Committee — he says: " Having done all that circumstances permitted, and regretting its (constitution) fall, through the defect of those who were most interested, at a period when honor and (/w/y summoned all democrats to their rights." Indeed! The only circumstance permitted him to do, he obstinately left undone ! He rejected Congress, and resorted to force ! Honor and duty did govern democrats, and prevented them from the commission of Crime ! His rebuke upon Suft>age men, who advised and urged him into his ill-advised measures, and who were the first to desert him, though severe, is merited and just ! A FALLACIOUS OPINION is extensively prevalent, that he was in)- prisoned for a political oftence, in asserting the rights of the people. If the preceding remarks are correct, upon the duties he owed to the Constitution of his country — his offence consisted in destroying the rights of the people ! It was but little short of a treasonable re- sistance to it. So near an approach was it, that the intervention of the Government he had offended, became necessary to repress its outrages! At the head of his Government, instead of applying to 10 Congress— he employed force— instead of avoiding, vrhich his posit- ion enjoined, lie invoked violence, regardless of all consequences, and thus became amenable to the penalties of disobedience, to the National Government, to which the State, over which he claimed to preside, had agreed, she would be amenable in such cases ! 1 he event that required this interposition was the result of his own mcon- siderate act, against which, the Government of the State de- manded the execution of the grant, to protect and suppress. The prescribad form of ])roof, that domestic violence did exist, was presented to the Executive of the Union. To discharge his du- ties and to avoid impeachment, which a neglect would have incurred, the energies of the nation were put into requisition, (mark the ob- ject, (not to execute the guarantee of Dorr's Constitution, but to sup- press the violence he had unlawfully created in attempting to guar- antee it by force— and to chastise his disobedience, as the rightful claimant Governor of a State, in defiance of the National Constitu- tion, which, while he held in one hand, arms to resist- he raised the other to Heaven, and invoked its behest— to defend ! ! ! DORR MISREPRESENTS AND TRADUCES THE NATIONAL AU- THORITIES — STIMULATES HIS ADHERENTS — ASSUMES A NEW POSITION -AND SEEKS SHELTER UNDER STATE SOV- EREIGNTY. THE CONTRAST. The positions of the President, in his letter to Governor Kmg, April 11, 184-3, it will be seen, are wilfully reversed and totally mis- represented by Dorr. The very excuses, on which he relies for a colorable .justification of his conduct, convict him of falsehood and crime against the National Government. PRESIDENT'S POSITIONS. First. He says, ' For the regulation of my conduct in any inter- position, which': may be called upon to make, between the govern- ment of a State and its citizens, I can only look to the Constitution and Laios of the United States, which plainly declare the ohliga- tions of the Executive department, and leave it no alternative ; as to the course it shall pursue,' — and refers to the guarantee and the acts of Congress of 1795 and 1807. The first prescribes the proclama- tion, calling forth the militia of other States— the second, a simul- taneous employment of the government forces. Second. ' By a careful consideration of the above acts,' it will be seen, says he, that ' no power is vested in the Executive to anticipate insurrectionary movements, &c. but there must be an actual insur- rection, manifested by lawless assemblages, &.c. to whom a procla- mation may be addressed, and who may be required to betake them- selves to their respective abodes.' But should ' an insurrection' act- ually occur, and ' a requisition be made to furnish protection, which is guaranteed to each State by the Constitution, I shall not be found to shrink from the performance of a duty, which, while it would be most painful, is at the same time most imperative.' Third. ' I have also to say, that in such a controversy, the Exec- utive COULD NOT look luto any real or supposed defects of the ex- isting government, in order to ascertain, whether some other plan of 50 government proposed for adoption, was better suited to the want*, and more in accordance with the wishes, of any portion of her citi- zens.' Fourth. ' To throw the Executive power of this government into any such controversy, would be to make the President the ARMED ARBITRATOR, between the people of the different States and their CONSTITUTED authorities,and might lead to a usurped pow- er, dangerous alike to the stability of the State governments and the liberties of the people.' Fifth. * It will be my duty, on the contrary, to respect the requi- sitions of that government which has been duly recognized as the existing government of the State through all time past, until I shall be advised, in regular manner, that it has been altered and abolished and another substituted in its place, by legal and peaceable proceed- ings, adopted and pursued by the authorities and people of the State." What is the" regular manner" of which the President can alone be advised, that a Govenrment of one of the original States, recog- nised by the Constitution has been superseded by another, where a controversy exists between the two 1 The execution of the guarantee, upon proper application by Con- gress, the '■' authorities ^' created by that instrument to adjust and settle for the people of a state,the controversy ! An act of Congress guaranteeing the superceding government, the people have adopted, in the place of that, which the Constitution had recognized 1 The regular manner of advisement, and the only manner, the Executive can take notice of, is the presentation to him of such an Act of Con- gress, and his own signature approving it, just as every act admitting a new State is. When these pre-requisites are complied with, the preceding government is abolished, and another " substituted " " by legal and peaceable proceedings, adopted and pursued, by the au- thorities and people of the State." This is the whole meaning of these last words, as the guarantee can be executed only on application by " the people " and " author- ity " of the State Government, guaranteed, precisely as a new State. See ante-reason 14. That he did use the words " authorities and people " in this sense, is obvious, for wherever he speaks of the State Government, before or after, he contra-distinguishes it, as the " constituted''' authorities, of the State, as in 4th position above and the following sentence, viz. " No portion of her people will be willing to drench her fair fields with the blood of her own brethren, in order tn obtain a redress of grievances, which their CONSTITUTED authorities can- not for any length of time resist, if properly appealed to by the pop- ular voice." While this proves Dorr's misconstruction, it adminis- ters a wholesome rebuke to his sanguinary propensities! POSITIONS OF DORR, CONTRA. [From his Boston Address. — August 10th, 1843.] First. — Grounds assumed by the President. Two things were by him taken for granted which have not been, and I trust never will ])e in this country admitted by the people, viz : that the people have no right to change a Government, in a peaceable and authentic man- per, without leave from the existing Legislature. 21 From what authority, this gratuitous and perverted charge is made against the President, is difficult to be seen. Not a syllable in his April letter warrants it. On the contrary, it is distinctly disclaimed, as in the third reason above. Dorr's misapprehension of t'le mean- ing and applicability of the terms " legal and peaceable proceedings of "the authorities and people of the State," puts words into tlie Pres- ident's language he never uttered, and perverts that language into an assumption, which it neither refers nor alludes to. All the President does say is — neither the ' defects in the existing government' nor, ' the plan of another proposed^ can control his duty ! Not a word — not an allusion to the right of the yreople to change their government, with or without the consent of their Legislature, in the whole letter, except through the guarantee of the national constitution, upon the ' Authorities and people,' who Imvc adopted the plan of another government ! The suggestion of ' legal and peaceable proceedings' seems to have frightened Dorr — bewildered his intellectual vision, and made him see and understand in the language of the President, what is there, not to be seen nor understood. Second. ' And the President of these States is the CONSTITU- TIONAL UMPIRE OF STATE RIGHTS, authorized to settle all domestic questions of this kind, sjnnmarili/ with the siiwrd,'m case of the non-acquiescence in his mandate to the oftending party, in favor of that, which he espouses.' This charge is still less warranted. It is not only opposed to the President's position, that he could take no notice of the forms or de- fects of either controverting government, but directly in opposition, to the fourth position above, that, the Executive of the Union, was not the constitutional Umpire — and that, ' to throw the Executive power into such a controversy, would make the President, the ARlMED ARBITRATOR, of, a usurped power ! Instead also, of being ' the Umpire of State rights' — the President, declares — such an assumplion would be ' dangerous alike to the stability of the State governments — and the liberties of the people. !!! Is it not most extraordinary that, a man situated as Dorr was, using force both, in defiance to state rights and the laws of hi.s country, should in his cooler judgment, deliberately charge the Pres- ident with assuming positions he positively disclaimed, and impute to him, motives and designs he distinctly disavowed ? merely, be- cause his solemn duties and obligations compelled him to interpose the guarantee and protect the Stale against lawless violence of which; Dorr himself was the originator! ! Third. 'He (the President) denies the sovereignty ofthepeopl&i The matter of fact considered by the President was, whether the people of Rhode Island had been invited, authorized or commanded to form and adopt a constitution by their superiors, the servants of the minority representing them in the Legislature.' Finding it was, * without any such formality, he at once assumed, the v/hole proceed- ing was null and void' — and ' was immediately set aside by his un- warrantable assumption — the form is every thing and the substance nothing.' This is no less than a wilful perversion of the President's lan- guage. Throughout the letter, there is not an allusion to the form or substance of the constitution: nor to the manner of forminjj or adopt- ing it — other than nhove — not a word upon the sovereignty of the peo|)le. On the contrary — the President says, 'I shall not adven- ture the expression of an opinion upon those questions oi domestic pol- icy, which seem to have given rise to the unfortunate controversies be- tween a portion of the citizens and the existing government of the State.' Is such a perversion of language so intelligible and distinct to be tolerated in any one — much less by Dorr? Yet his adherents be- lieve to this day that President Tyler is a tyrant, by his (D's) mis- representations !! Fourth. ' This doctrine' says lie, ' was embodied in a letter said to have been prepared by the Secretary (Mr. Webster) to Gov. King in April 1842, in which it is set forth explicitly, that no valid change of a State government, can take place, without the consent of the au- thorities and people — the authorities being first in time and import- jiiice — and the agency of the people being secondary.' This shows also lie wholly mistook the sense, in which these words were used by Mr. Webster, whose legislative and judicial experience in the mode and manner of admitting new states, undoubtedly dicta- ted their use in contradistinction to the ' constituted authorities' of the State. If he did not misapprehend them, then he wilfully misrepre- .«ented them, to deceive and keep his adherents together, by stimula- ting their prejudices against the President ! Another reason, that proves these words were used in this sense — is the reference in the letter to the guarantee itself — and disproves Dorr's use of them. For, if the Legislature had the power to command and give consent at all — it needed not the voluntary aid of the people to make the change ! The power to command and give consent, could enforce obedience of the people, to the change, without their assent. But applied to the execution of the guarantee, and the establishment of a new gov- ernment ; and tlieir meaning, in distinction from constituted authori- ties of the State, is plain. Congress can take no notice of a constitution and government adopted in opposition to an existing government — unless upon appli- cation of the former, by its agents jtroperli/ authorized for that pur- pose, to have the new government guaranteed. It is then accom- plished by the outhorities and people of the new, and not by the constituted authorities of the old government. Yet, Dorr for purposes condemned by the national Constitution, sixteen months after his transgressions against it, deliberately arraigns its authoritieSjby charging them, with, usurping powers they distinct- ly disclaimed — and with uttering sentiments they have not expressed. Fifth. ' The President claims to arbitrate upon the rights of the people with the SWORD — asserts that the people have no right to amend their institutions without permission of the authorities — but also sets forth the dangerous doctrine — that the national Executive, is the Ultimate Judge and Umpire, in all questions of the kind that may arise in the States.' Yet, the President in a letter June 25, 1842, to Gov. King, says — ' Your Excellency has unintentionally overlooked the fact, that the Legislature is now in session — The act of Congress, Feby. 1795, gives no power to summon to the aid of the State, the Military forct 23 of the United States, unless an application shall be made by the Legislature if in session, and that the State Executive cannot (make it) except when the Legislature cannot be convened.' I presume your Excellency has been led into the error, from a misaspprehension of the true import of my letter of May 7,' in which he also says, mark the import ! — ' but, however painfid the duty, I have to assure your Excellency that, if resistance be njjide to tbe ex- ecution of the Laws of Rhode Island by such force, as the Civil posse shall be unable to overcome, it will be the duty of this government to enforce the constitutional guarantee — a guarantee given and adop- ted mutually by all the original States, of which Rhode Island was one, and which in the same way, has been given and adopted by each of the States since, admitted into the Union.' In his message to the House of Representatives, called forth by one of Mr. Burke's resolutions, April 9. 1844, he says — ' I utterly repudiate the idea, in terms as emphatic as I can employ, those Laws are not to be enforced, or those guarantees complied with, because the President may believe that the right ofsuflVage or any other great popular right, is either too restricted or too broadly enlarged. I also with equal strength, resist the idea that, it falls within the Executive cowpetency to decide, in CONTROVERSIES of the na- ture of that which existed in Rhode Island. For the Executive to assume such a power, would be to assume a power of tlie most dan- gerous character. Under such assumptions, the States of this Union would have no security for peace or tranquillity, but be converted in- to the mere instruments of Executive Will.' This is but a re-affirmation of the import of the letters of the Presi- dent of April and May, and Secretary Webster — whom this young CROMWELL chastises so unmercifully — viz.' Let it be added that Tyler and Webster claim to be the followers of the illustrious author «f the declaration of Independence — the first originally, the second afar off, and with the spirit of recent adoption : and tlie picture is completed ! ! !' If the false positions he charges upon the constituted authorities are to prevail, he asks — ' I ask, then, where is the true conservative element of our system, if it be not in the reserved sovercigafi/ of the people V The answer is short, young man ! Precisely where the constitu- tion and the agreement of the people have deposited it.' In the exercise of your reserved sovereignty — form your ' republic- an' constitution: — if it be resisted by the existing government; — appeal to Congress, not to the President as you did do, and ASR them to establish — guarantee it furyou, by the employment of your own resources, if necessary — which you, as an original State, eqnaJlj with the others, have granted to the United Stales — and solemnly a- greed, should be exercised by them, to protect the |)eople from vio- lence and bloodshed, which your wrongful and forbidden measures had provoked and nearly accomplished ! ! ! Thus, you would have avoided their interposition, and shunned the penalties of your transgression. Under a mistaken notion oi reserved sovereignty, of which he so much boasts — and a wild or purposely perverted version of the Pre- sident's explicit views, he rebukes and censures him in the following offensive and ungentleraanly language, viz. u ' Whose measures and appointments are directed towards per sonal objects, under the stiiniikis of an inordinate and diseased van- ity, which craves ri popular election to a place for which nature and his constituents never intended him : who contaminates all that he touches, and in his turn, is worked upon through a dangerous facil- ity of disposition, by sinister and unprincipled advisers,' &c. ' If such a man should arise in this country, God forbid that lie should hold in his hands the political rights of Rhode-Island, or any other State' ! ! ! ' A lord paramount, or a supreme military despot, could do no more, under the same circumstances: And such is John Tyler, in his relation to the people of Pv,liode-Is!and.' After an allusion, tiiat if the President's acts had been directed to the larger States, and boldly asserting they would liave been resist- ed, he says, ' So tliat the army, when it came, would have served rather to fertilize, the soil, than to suppress the rights of the citizens. ]?ut Rhode-Island has paid the penalty of her contracted territory, imposed by the President. His veto of the rights of Rhode-Island. casts all his other vetoes into the shade.' W ! To cap the clunax, he repudiates Congress, and becomes an an- tagonist to Edmund Burke, in constitutional heterodoxes. ' Tiie tiieory,' says he, ' of eoiistitutional rights, is thus reversed by the E.vecntivc. Henceforth, enlightened by tiie logic of the Pre- sident's advisers, we are to bear in mind that the States and the people are the creatures of one of the central poAvers, which they are supposed to have created.' . . . ' It would be bad enough if the Congress of the United States should assume to dictate to the peo- ple of the States, the measures of their rights, and the Constitutions, under which they should live.' Here the Constitution — the laws of the Union — the Union itself — the uniformity of republican governments among the States-^the one form of republican constitution, the States have limited them- hclves to form by the guarantee — the authority to enforce and estab- lish it in the last resort — the prohibition from a resort to any other course — the guarantee for protection against vioknce — are annihil- ated by one dash of his envenomed pen ! ! ! . Burke is cast into nothingness — and even his absurdity is tram- pled under foot. VIOLATION OF ANOTHER CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION— THE INTERVENTION OF THE GOVERNMENT—AN "UNAUTHOR- IZED INVASION "—THE PRESIDENT, THE " INVADER'— WAR WITH THE UNITED STATES, ARRESTED BY THE PATRIOTISM OF THE PEOPLE. Defeated at home in his unwarranted resort to the physical re- sources of the State, which of itself, had infracted the two pov/ers o-f the guarantee and protection, and called forth the intervention of the national government. Dorr rushed madly against another constitu- tional provision, and boldly incurred another HIGH OFFENCE, it not TREASON against the United States ! Failing in his offensive movements with State resources', and as CHIEF MAGISTRATE, owing allegiance to the national Consti. Its ' y tution, he determined on accomplishing his forbidden purpoies, bj^ other forbidden means. As a MILITARY CHIEFTAIN, at a period of no foreign inva'- sion, and without permit of Congress — regardless of ail consequen- ce's— he sought abroad the DISEASED MASSES-^enlisted them into his service — organized armed bands, — contracted and received the sinews and munitions of vvar — for the avowed purpose, of resist- inland disputing the requisitions and supremacy of the government of the Union! ! ! Let all innocent men pause and shudder, at the frightful precipice of rebellion and treason against that Union, to which they were in- ccnsiderately harried, under a mistaken ' view of popular sovereignr ty within State limits' by the impetuous indiscretion of a, youthful and i«exo/-a6/c ADVENTURER ! !! This is the provision — Art. I. Sec. 10. ' No State shall enter into any treaty, ALLIANCE or CONFEDERATION.* * * No State shall, without the consent of Congress, * * Keep troops in time of peace, enter into any agreement, or, compact with another Slate, or, with a foreign poVver, or, engage in war, unless actually invaded." An agreement or compact with another State, or f vVith the masses which he calls sovereignty) for any— much fess for the unlawful purposes of engaging in war, in lime of peace, — are no less crimes, than an agreement with a' foreign power;' nor can they be justified except in an actual invasion, or imminent danger thereof. Yet, in open violation of this provision, under the false pretext of his opponents' example, he unlawfully, first invades hJs native State", with armed and disciplined BANDS of her own firizens'-'seeks and ORGANIZES FORCES irt Other States, SEDUCES both the inno- cent and lawless from their allegiance to their own States and the t'nion— COMPACTS and AGREES with them, without consent of Congress, and PROPOSES to MARCH and COMMAND them into the State and ENGAGE IN WAR, with whom? the FORCES of the National Government, which he STIGMATISES as a' supei- rior force from without", falsely arrogating to itself an offensive and dangerous supremacy." (t?* He says, " I INVOKED AID to i-esciie the majority, from an unequal contest with ANOTHER FORCE to be iSnjustifiably intro- duced from without. Believing this FORCE to be set in motion, to be used in SUPPRESSING the rights and liberties of the majority ip Rhode Island, OUR FRIENDS AVOWED THEIR READI- NESS to lend this aid, and PREPARED themselves to lend it | 8:7^and had the PEOPLE of R. Island and their REPRESENTA, TIVES, maintained the ground, which they assurned, in the support of the constitution, and not shrunk away from it, livhen, the DECI- SIVE OCCASIONS presented themselves — they would have 'jeen POWERFULLY and SUCCESSFULLY sustained.;/][} — ^and the inter-J^ntion of John Tyler would HAVE MADE RHODE-ISLAJ^'D THE BATTLE GROUND OF AMERICAN FREEDOK-".^ What is this, but asserted treason against the l-'nited States t What was this invocation of aid froiii other States — but an openj unqualified and inexcusable violation of the Con^'it^ution of, the Un- ion ! The INTERVENTION of the Natior-I Governmen* to sup. 4 press his outrajres against civil liberty — is here doclared to l)e " AN- OTHER FORCE UNJUSTIFIABLY INTRODUCED from without"— and MADE THE PRETEXT, FOR THE BATTLE GROUND of a general extermination — instead of American free- dom ! ! " I hold," says he, •' that the people of R,hode Island were com- petent, and had the exclusive ri^/ii to attend to and manage their own afiairs, in their own time, and in their own way." (After sta- ting that the President was furnished witii the "necessary explana- tions" to counteract the partial and injurious representations of the character of the constitutional party, which he admits was all that was done,)he adds, (rj=-" But when aa UNAUTHORIZED INVA- SION from abroad was invited hij our opponents — and the AID was at hand to enforce the commands of the INVADER — the time had ar- rived to encpiire, if our countrymen of other States WERE DIS- POSED to look on in silence, and to see the people of a small State home down, WITHOUT ASSISTANCE, by an act of USURPATION, and SACRIFICED to the UNJUSTIFIABLE POLICY OF THE EXECUTIVE.".^^ Here the guarantee which he scornfully rejected, the employment of physical resources, it had forbidden him to use, are boldly resumed and iorested from Congress, because, as he says, " with the views I entertain respecting popular sovereignty within State limits" the people had the EXCLUSIVE RIGHT to use them in their own time and in their OWN WAY. Though each State, by adopting the Constitution, had devested herself of the right, and had granted both, it and her own resources to the United States, for the very purpose, of settling peaceably and legally such controversies, and for preventing his outrages, which caused the intervention of the Government to quell and suppress, yet, this ?/o«rt^ 7nan under a mistaken view of "popular sovereignty within State limits" denounces this intervention as an INVASION of the State, an act of usurpation, i\ad sti/lcs the Executive an INVA- DER, actuated and governed by an unjustifiable jjolicy." Nor is the excuse he fenders for invoking aid from abroad, because his opponents had done so, more available to him. The application of the State Government, was in the legal and prescribed form, and as the President says, left him no alternative. Theirs was a legal mode of i)rocedure — his, an illegal and interdicted one. Theirs, conformed to the Constitution, his violated and infracted it ! ! ! I ask, my fellow citizens, to reflect upon the " dangerous heresies" against which I have endeavored to guard them, and for which the whole Dorr Inaction have risen up against me. T*ause and reflect, upon the situation you ; who lent and prepared your-^iid, upon the invocation of Dorr, without permission of his af- iiancedrjtovernment, would have placed yourselves, if the people and their I'eprujentatives, /lad not shrunk from the ground he assumed. The sccHc to which he invited you, "when the decisive occasions presented thenNelves," was the arena of treason, against the lawful intervention of tht. Government of your country — instead of the bat- tle ground of liberty. The FOE, with who^o youM-ere seduced, to break a lance, was that ARM of the National Cuistitution, which now shields and protects you, from the horrors you ^>*ii-e about to perpetrate. 27 The "UNAUTHORIZED INVASION" yon were to meet was its lawful interposition to protect yonr wives, your innocents, yonr ^'"Tl'e " INVADER " yon was to face, was the rightful Executive "''The^STRUGGLE, you were to engage ia-was no longer a con- tpst for coustitutioiKil freedom. . , ^.i,^^ The fir BLOW, you struck, on sucii an occasion added another crime to your prohibited compact with Dorr-another forte.ture of VOL? a leaianci and another infraction of the Constitution. ^ The fiTdrop of blood tliat crimsoned the soil proclaimed you TRAITORS and consummated your Treason ! . . That yon escaped these consequences-no thanks aie due to oi- His rashness and inexperience would have ruined all alike- h^K not we the people, who elevated him to the station he occupied ;l;:^tn:;ic^rtJ, rep-edhiserror^and -thc^w onr^^t To them von are indebted, not to him ; for rescumg yourselves tro m the 1 a^ rdous leap, yon were betrayed to take,-and your countiy from aJivd strifcfthat might have ended in the abruption of all our ^'7ft^c:::iderationsdo notweanhis in^itn^ed devc^e^wh. have been decoved from the path of duty and obligations to their countrv, into the meshes of Dorrism, I know not what can. Investicrate this ««o»m/i/-and its revolting^ and abhorient here sies will be seen, felt, " deserted and avoided. In spite of experience and " the injuries he npon ^'^''^^Zcol ed," he still persists, with a '' diseased vanity' m traducing t le Con_ stitutional Authoi-ities, with similar hostde. feelings, ^ay, he re as serts his assumed right to compact with other States for aid-to resist the lawful interposition of the Government and reassures us— if the people had been true to themselves, it would have been resist- ed '' ' ' 1 r'- In July last, in his reply to a Democratic Committee oi the City of New York, alluding to his military demonstration upon the public Arsenal, in May, 1842, he says: .^ ,l,pni " Had our people, at that period of disaster, been true to tliem- selves, ihey would have had nothing to fear from th^ . ^?^'\7^^°y ^^^^ ARMEo INTERVENTION of the [then] National Chief Ma g^str"te who may seek in vain beneath ih^ pall of ft friendly oblivion v^-^Ax is rapidly descending upon him, to conceal the outrage which he PERPETRATED Upon tllC EIGHTS OF THE StATE." ,-,„ + •,„ Here acrain, the interposition, he had infracted the Constitution to resist b'y foreign aid, is reaffirmed to be unauthonzcd, and an out- rage upon the State ! Is not this delusion deluded? FLIGHT— RETURN— OFFENCE. The results of that fatal demonstration are well known. The cause he attempted to sustain by illegal ^nd forbidden force, vvas lost by constitutional and authorised, counter force. He fled inglorious- ly. His misguided adherents were subdued into silence. In exile, he sought safety and protection. i ' i • .• „ At lenath, against friendly admonition, he returned to his n.tive State, whose citizens, he had involved in sanguinanj stnje, md whose security he had jeopardised by civil commotion, to brave her S8. ioUiorttj and to deff her cbaatisement. The offenc* of which, he. was convicted whs Levying war against the State, made Treason by the criminal code of 1838, in the enacting of which, he himself participated. The political offence made Treason, by the Algerine Law, (so called,) consisted iij" exercising ike functions of a Legisla- tive office,'^ under his Constitution. An offence totally distinct from " Letting War,^' Had he, as Chief Magistrate, fn obedience to his duties- — pursued the course designated, and avoided the overt c(ct of Levying War — his offence would have been strictly political. -r— He could have been convicted, if at all, for none other — for he would then have committed none other. In the event of conviction and imprisonment for this offence, how far the sympathies of the entire nation would have been aroused and exerted, it is impossible to con- jecture. This was not the fact.* HIS CLAIMS AS CJHA.M.PION OF CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM- HE VIOLATES HIS OWN CONSTITUTION— AND TRAMPLES THE ACTS OF HIS LEGISLATURE UNDER FOOT. Nothing more frequently meets the view in some of the public papers, thkn the ascription to him of "Champion of Constitutional Liberty.". How far his claims to this distinction will be found to be compati- ble with the aforegoing, and the following facts — each will judge for himself The excessive licenses with his Constitution and Legisla- ture, certairdy impart no new lustre, not wreathe no new laurels. ••NO MAN CAN RISE IJI| TO GAINSAY MX FI,PELITY TO THE COJ^StlTI/TiON."— (Boston Address.) Unfortunate challenge, my friead ! I do not so rise up-r-it is your- selfj vyho impeaches that fidelity ! It has been said, in the exuberance of admiration for him, that, " His career andM\^ relations with his fellow men, form the test, for the sTAiBiLtTY of Government, and the securitt of inalienable RIGHTS." — [Albany Democratic Committee, August last.]. His utter djsregardjof the acts of. his own Legislature, and the sanctity of his own Constitution, to which h.e professes such an:.un- conquerable attachment, is no less reckless, than that evinced for the Constitution of the l/nion. Indeed, Constit^utional obligations and restrictions, were mere cobwebs, in the way of accomplishing his purposes. By Article 4, Section II, of his Constitution, tjie. appointment of all military officers, except captains and other inferior officers of military companies, was vested, in Jiis General Assembly, in Grand Committee. •Upon his trial and conviction, my views liave been pujillcly given. I dis- sented from the construction given to the Algerine Act, by the Supreme Court, by which, they entertained jurisdiction over the indictvient, found in the County of Newport. By the law of 1838, Levying War, could be pro- ceeded against only in the County, where it was committed. The Indict- ment charged the offence in the County of Ptovidence. By the JiJgcrine Law— the three offences therein enumerated, werg made indictable in any County, without regard to the County where committed. Upon a just con- struction of that Act, its enumerated offences alone, were indictable out of •the County where committed. For this reason, I held the trial at Newport^ for Levying War, tto be a nullity. On mature reflection, I have not changeel f hat opinion. 9dh On the third of May, 184'J, tliat body was organized, and Major— Adjvtant— Quartermaster— Cotnmsisarij Generals — a Ungade In^ ipector, and other officers of Staff— were appointed. The Constitutional power of appointing military officers, was, therefore, rightfully exercised and exhausted. The only power re- served to the Governor, as Commander-in-Chief, was to summcn these officers when qualified, upon lawful duty, lie was not even au- thorized to fill vacancies. Yet we find he transcended his own Con- stitution, and assumed the power to appoint new military officers, even while those already appointed by his Grand Committee, were iu full commission." For this fact, we are indebted to k'fs own admi£?ion, as no record of his assumed authority, has yet transpired. On his return to the State," May 16th, from a Mission abroad, for, foreign aid, which he thus describes " having accomplished the mo^t mportant object for which I departed;' with an expressed intention "to establish his Government in fact," he tells us he '^ assembled what appeared to be a sujficient force, to accomplish the object." On the 18th, he deployed before the Arsenal. lie tells us also, "" the ATTEMPT FAILED from DESERTION,— for w.vNT of better ORGANIZA- TION— and., OF OFFICERS," viz : The failure to accomplish our object, though we wej6 left with the means before possessed, to uenbw the attempt, naturaljy en- couraged our opponents, and raised the determination on their part to assume the offensive. Of this we were fulhj apprised ; a.)d on ^™«" (Marshall Anthony's house,) to head quarters, NEW OF- FICERS WERE APPOINTED." By whom ? By the Grand Committee of his Legislature ? By what authority then ? " Possessed of the means," he wanted officers to reneiq the attcvip^t r and " this want," was made the pretext fpr, transcending and violation his own Constitution ! What military Despot, would have scrupled less, in assuming and- exercising unauthorized power ? What aggravates this violation, and renders it still more unjustifi- able IS, he assumed and exercised this power, after his own Le^islat- UNCOn4 I'lTU^^^^^^^ '"^ ""^'" '' "^''" '"'^' ^''''""'' ^'^ ^^^ From the transpired record^ of that Legislature, il; appears that an Act of this import, some how found its iv(iy into that Body. B\ Whom drawn, or by ^yhom presented, or what has become of it, we know nothing beyond the following record notice of it, viz : ' 1 he Act submitted to ENAiJLE THE Governor to appoint and COMMISSION Officers, and to organize th^ Militia, was taken up, debated, and committed to Mr. Brown, of Gloucester. Mr. Brown made report that the Act referred to him, giving the Governpr cer- ST^TT'I^m^^'V''""'''''''''^''' ^""^ organizing the Militia, is VNCON- «^;J \ r , •■ "^""^ ""'^^ ^"^ ^^ discharged, from the further con- sideration of the same. Voted to discharge the Committee, and the Act IS laid on the table." fnfi^'' ^'T"" '" ^ ^^'•''y^^^ and seeips to have understood the Consti- r^/A "^rrrt '^V^^'^'abimy from hasty legislation. Dnhirt f ''I-*^'^^°^>''^^^'^'^hnotraceisto be found in its published proceedings, is too important lo escape notice. ..rr ^fS"'^^"''^' ^"i<5ng "» first acts, solemnly refused to sanction, •!• permit a resort to force, as he requested. 30 He proposed to take forcible possession of the State House, and public property, and asked them to sanction and authorize it. He admits the fact, and says, " The period for decided action had now arrived. If the Government were such, it was entitled to sit in the usual places of Legislation, to possess and control the public j)roperty. It was my strong opinion and desire that, when the Leg- islature had been organized, .... they should forthwith proceed to the work of legislation in the place occupied by their predecessors." — [Boston Address.] Monstrous error ! Here was the exact point, where he should have stopt — until his Government had been established by an ap- peal to the Guarantee. At that time, there was assend)led an armed force, deemed suflic- ient for that purpose, and no counter force to prevent it. This proposal was entertained, — postponed until the afternoon for consideration, — then fully debated, — and finally rejected, by a large majority, — as a step impolitic, ruinous and dangerous in its tenden- cy, both to the peace of the State, and of the United States.* His exercise of this power, and resort to force after this, because he wanted officers " to renew the conflict," alike forbidden by the National Constitution, and his own Legislature — furnishes — a sad "TEST" for the security of the rights of the people, or for the STABILITY of their Government ! ! ! ATTEMPT TO FIX HIS RESPONSIBILITY UPON HIS LEGISLAT- URE. A strange elasticity of interpreting Constitutional and Legislative Acts, is developed in the construction he put upon the following Reso- lution passed by his Legislature on the eve of its adjournment, viz : " Resolved, That the Governor he requested to call on all persons, who are in possession, or have charge, of any of the public property, to deliver the possession, or charge of said property, to the authori- ties, and officers acting under the Constitution, and Laws of this State." Three days afterwards, mortified and chagrined at the inglorious result of his charge upon the Arsenal, and under the panoply of exile, he hastened to excuse that " deplorable event" in an address to the people of the State, dated May 2L In that address, evincing in every sentence, vindictive feelings and sididucd -^xuXe, he attempted to shift from himself the odium of that adventure then every where accumulating upon him, and to Jix, the responsibility of it, upon his Legislature, viz : * Mr. Barney spoke against it, and referred complimentary to the opinion ihe had taken. Dorr was present. The late Major N. Mowry, ofSmithfield. a member of the House, one of the firmest and most influeniial friends of fiie Constitution, witii a palriotisni for wliich he was distinguished, in a short sentence, after Marshal Anthony, then Sheriff, reported the Court-House was denied by the State autliorities, killed tho proposal of Dorr quite dead ; — he said, "Mr. Speaker, I have no idea of breaking bolts and bars — if we cannot liave it without fighting for it, let us adjourn and go home." This pithy sentence had a like effect upon that body — as an act of his uncle Daniel Alovvry, then member of Congress, had, upon General Armstrong's meeting — to impeach General Washington for cowardice, &c. — to which he (Mr. M.) had been invited, and wiio, when ask- ed to impeach or not — very coolly took his hat and said, " If this is your busi- ness, gentlemen, I bid you good night.' The meeting dispersed I I 31 " This resolution (says he) was j)rocIaimed hy me, and /7 was part -of my obligation to enforce it, equally with ihe other laws of the State." I cannot understand the system of ethics, by which such a con- struction was put upon this resolution. In its broadest sense, it is not susceptible of any such interpretation. It was merely directory to him, to perform a simple request, which being performed, its pow- er ceased. It was not a law, imposing a penalty or mulcting a fine upon any one, for disobedience, or non-compliance. His proclamation of it, exhausted every obligation, it imposed up- on him ! By that, all persons having possession, or charge of any public property, were reqested to deliver it, and all Officers acting under the Constitution, Avere thus notified to receive it. It fixed no penalty for not delivering, none for not receiving. Much less did it contain any obligation to enforce it hy force. His Legislature had refused that. That he mistook its import is obvious from an act, passed prior to the passage of this resolution, entitled An Act "imposing duties upon licensed persons and bodies corporate m this State." This act made all persons, and bodies corporate, liable in suits by the General Treasurer, for double the amount of money or other property, on refusal to deliver it up, " after being duly required thereto}' The act was defective in this, that no person was designated to make the request, without which no suit could be brought. On the discovery of this omission, this resolution was subsequently passed, designating the Governor as the official organ of the State, to make the request. This was the only obligation it imposed upon him or any body else, which teas discharged by his proclamation. With what propriety, then, he attempted to fix upon the Legisla- ture, the responsibility of his own indiscretion, under color of this harmless simple resolution, I leave to his admirers to judge. DORR ALONE RESPONSIBLE. That the defeat of the Suffi-age cause, and overthrow of the Con- stitution are alone attributable, to his " ill-advised and rash meas- ures," will be seen by the following facts. LANDHOLDERS' CONSTITUTION, MARCH, 1842. The first in the series, as results have proved, was his obstinate opposition to the Landholders' Constitution, (so called) which, as now agreed by all, was far preferable to the ])resent one. Had this Constitution been adopted, it would have superceded the people's. I, in common with the democratic party, though we disapproved of some of its provisions, urged its acceptance, to secure the liberal provisions of suffi-age it provided, and to put an end to further agitation. Dorr was indomitable, and determined to defeat it. He de- clared he would not accept it, " were it word for word like the People's — because it emanated from the " Landholders." He was then Candidate for Governor, and had assumed and acquired an ascendancy over the Suffiage party, who were per- hiiiUed io vote under it, nlmost supteme. He issued his decree to Ihem accordingly (Old town liouse resoiutionsj Its adoption was de- feated by a small majority ,'produced by the votes of those,who preferred the Charter, of whom 1 was one.* Had that Constitution been accepted, however, the non-freehold- ers and the demecrajic party, by uniting, would have succeeded to the administration of the Stote government, and all trouble would have been avoided : Dorr possibly might have been Governor, but older and safer men might have againpbeen preferred. This he was fully aWare of Hence his^in\erest in defeating thatj Constitution. FACTS RELATIVE TO THE ARSENAL. . The attack upon the Arsenal was on the night of the 18th of May; In a handbill published May 21, though in circulation some days previous, to which the names of Hezekiah Willard and ten others, are appended, is the following significant language, viz. " We the undersigned, elected Senators and Representative's to the General Assembly, and to other offices under the People's Con- stitution, . . . in consideration of the EVILS, which we think must fensue to oiir common country, from our engaging in a contest with the General Government, .... we feel constrained to decline act- ing further in the several offices ioXwhich we have been elected, and therefore we resign. *' Neither can ice lior have we countenanced in any manner, the late mcJvemfent of the Governor, elected under the People's Corisli- lution ; but in every way, have endeavoured to counteract and pre- vent so deplorable an act, and one so destructive to the cause, in which we have been engaged." May 30j in his card. Judge Benjamin Cowell, a leading friend of the Constitution— ^says — " The undersigned beg leave further to state, ihat so far (rom approving such measures, he rcwons^ra^er;? against their use ; that when it was proposed to take the State-House, at the time the Constitutional Jiegislature met, he remonstrated with D.'s friepds against using any forcible measiires for that purpose." The deplorable act, deprecated so vehemently by his own friends, was the overt act of LEVYING WAR, for which he was con- victed. A€OT HILL EXPEDITION, FROM ABOUT THE 15th TO 27th JUNE, 1842. His second enterprise at this memorable place; is kill less defensi" Die. The precise objects of the military gathering there, were not dt first distinctly announced, though they were generally nnderstoodi, From May 25, io June 2ist, lie resided principally in the city of New York. Rumors thence, told of formidable preparations for the tenewal of hostilities against the State. In the mean tiriie, the State Legislature, p'assed an act, calling a Convention to form another Constitution. The liberal basis of suff- rage provided, for the election of delegates, atid for voting under if When formed, embraced sUbstarltially the grievances complained of •Votes for— 8013— Against— 8689— Majority, 676. Whole Vote for the People's Constitution was 13,944 — Whole vote for Dorr, unop()osed — 6,417 — 7,527 less than for his Constitution, and O" 555 lesrf ^han half-^ri iSee ante, page 6- 33 by non-freenolders, and was satisfactory to all parties, except a small g!-oupe of his followers in the city of Pi'ovidence and vicinity. PROOF. In a circular, dated June 24th, signed by Dutee J. Pearce, George C. Shaw, Sanford liell, Robert J^. Carr, Benjamin Chase, Daniel Brown, is the following emphatic language, viz. " We were opposed to the hostile movements recently made in this State— sonle Of us labored hard to present them : we are now opposed to any movements of the kind. . . ., . The late act of the Legisla- ture, providing for calling a Convention of the people, in Mdst of its jjrovisions, i/neets ou'r cordial approbation. : . . . ,We whQ were members of the Legislature, iinder the people's Con- stitution long since relinquished all idea of ever again taking our sedts in the same. . . . We are of opinion, that under the existing circumstances, it would be the height of folly for that Legislature to attempt again to organized ,, In another, dated Natick, June 25th, signed by Emanuel Rice; ahd fifty others, speaking of the santie Actj they say — " That its liberBl provisions will satisfy the expectations of the great body of the people," and " recomniend" to their " suitrage friends ac- quiescence" in it. . In ahothei: dated at Warwick same day— signed by Pardon Spencer and a great number of others — ^they say— " We, the: undersigned, who have heretofore acted with the Suf- frage party arid voted for the People's ,Constitution, desire for the pdrpose of quieting and putting an end io i\iQ present unhappy state of things, .... that we deem it expedient iiilly to pcquiesce ii} the Act of ihe Greneral Assembly, . . . and hereby earnesi/^ recommend a like acquiescence on the part of all our friends." One more, dated June 27th, though circulated many days before; as will be seen below — signed by forty names published, and hun- dreds of others of the City and vicinity of Providence, who now ar- rogate to themselves the exclusive derqocracy. A^ few names serve to show its character — David Daniels, Waltei; S. Burgess, Hezekiah Willard, Samuel H. Wales, David Biirt, Tobias L. Warner, Wm, Slrhoris, Jun., roper. These circulars were circulated with great industry long before they appeared in the public journals — to arrest the threatening pro- gress of affairs at Acot HiU, under the direction of Dorr. On the 28th of June, the senior Editor of the Republican Herald^ whose daily intercourse with leading men from all parts of the State, enabled him to ascertain the general opinion of the people to a greater extent than any other individual,, in publishing these Circu lars, in an Editorial article, held the following language, viz : •' In supporting the cause of the Suffrage party, we believed from the beginning and believe now — thiit we were supporting the cause of Democracy. It was never our understanding that the principles were to be carried out at the expense of the life blood of any portion of our fellow-citizens, because the Judicial Tribunals of our country were always accessible— and to thai ordeal, we were willing to sub- mit: After the unhappy, ill-contrived ami illradvised proceeding of the ■ 18th of May, we hoped, that no further rash and sanguinary meas- ures, would be resorted to, and we hnew that this was the General opinion of the great body of the Suffrage party." Others of like character might be added. Of the existence of these facts and of this general opinion^ so pointedly condemnatory of his conduct and measures, he was fully advised. Yet, in utter disregard and contempt of them, he was shdking beneath the man- tle of night, in the infected recesses and dark purlieus of a distant City, devising means and organizing forces, with an accomplice in premeditated mischief^ to avenge himself of his native State for hav- ing prevented his crimsoning her soil with the blood of her citizens in " sanguinary strife." (See late confessions of Michael Walsh.), ms EXCUSE. After a year's reflection, in his Boston Address, he attempts to excuse the tragedy of Acot Hill, under the pretence of fidelity to his Government, and to mainlaii* "a Session of the Legislature," he says : ; " If the great object in view, the complete estabJishnent of the Government, could not be immediately carried into effect, at all events, a Session of the Legislature could be maintained ; and the 35 tcork of i\ic first session, which, in w/Hf j^artkulars was left unfin- ished, could be completed." He never uttered a sentence of more momentous meaning. It effaces every vestige of honesty of purpose, Which charity has some- times allowed for his indiscretions. It rebiikes, with unblushing boldness, his own Legislature, for refusing, at its first session, his proposal to take the State House by force. It boldly avows " the establishment of the Government, and the maintenance '•' of a Session of the Legislature," by the slaughter and butchery of his fellow citizens, if necessary, while his own per- son was shielded from liarm, by a body guard of imported " Spar- tans !" Where this Session was to be maintained is left indefinite. By the act of adjournment, as appears of record, it was to be held at Providence, on the first Monday of July. It could meet, therefore, at no other place, unless otherwise or- dered by his proclamation for its safety. A power conferred by the Constitution. No such proclamation, or if such, I never saw it, was ever made, or at least, ever officially announced. No summons ever issued to the members to assemble at Chepatchet. It could not, therefore, meet at Acot Hill. No Session was held, or attempted to be held. But what renders this excuse, still more astonishing, there was no ^uch Legislature in existence, at that time. Most of its members, two or three before the Session, who im- mortalized the " FOUNDRY," had long before, resigned and abandoned the Government, and as Messrs. Pearce, and others, had declared, " all attempt to meet again to organize, would be the height of folly." (See also official correspondence between the au- thorities of this State and Daniel Webster, Secretary of the United States, counnunicated to Congress, by President Tyler.) Hisown version of it, is thus, viz : " Several of these members of the Legislature joined in addressing me a letter, to announce their resignation — and that, their support, and that of the citizens, was withdrawn from me." Is his excuse then consistent with these facts, of which he here admits he had notice five weeks before this mad attempt to maintain a Session 1 Let the public judge. My respect and charity for him restrain further comment ! HE ADVISED AND CONTROLLED THE ASSEMBLAGE WITHOUT ADVISEMENT OF HIS NEW MILITATY OFFICERS. Walsh's statement is supported by Dorr himself, nearly two years before, and shows that, while in the City of New York, he procured the assemblage al Chepatchet, and subsequently controlled it, with- out the advice of a Council of his officers, which he had ordered to meet there for consultation. Here are his own words, viz : " An order was sent to convene a Council of Military Officers at Chepatchet, to determine whether it were feasible to make any movement at present, and if so, in what manner. No such Electing, or Council was held." The admissions of both, " Principal,'^ and Walch, his " Accomplice,'" harmonize and support each other. He left New York, on the 21st, for, and arrived at Chepatchet* June 23-4, in the night. The order must have been sent before the assemblage; and, therefore, procured it. 36 Wl^at other directions it contained are not disclosed ! Sufficient 13 it, an order was sent, and his new Officers appointed by himself, in contravention of his Constitution and his Legislature, did not meet in Council. No determinatioti, no advice upon the "feasibility," of" any move- ment," was had or given ! Yet, on his arrival, in contempt of all these proofs, condemning his conduct and measures, and without even " the screen of a military council," for a colorable excise, he cs- 5<^mef? command of the heterogeneous firces there assembled-:— exercised them in martial tactics, both offensive and defensive— orppomfed NEW, — remoddkd the rank of old officers, and again Levied War against both the State and United States. In the face of all these circumstances, one would ^uppose he would have paused in the further prosecution of his sanguinary pur- poses — especially after his fatal experience of the desertion of his forces and officers at the Arsenal, as he admits, viz : " Most of the men had returned to their places of abode in the City." Quern Deus mat dementat. FAI]^.URE OF ARMS— RESIGNATIONS. In his address May 21st, he says, — " I cannot conclude this com- munication without reminding you that, your Constitution being founded in right and justice, cannot be overthrown by a failure OF ARMS, or by the resignation of those elected to office under it." The proposition, that a Constitution cannot be overthrown by " a failure of arms," is oinew coinage, in the science of Government or history. It is a perfect anomaly in our Republican system, and a ** non sequiter" from any hypothesis. History proves that Governments have been overthrown by the success of arms, and Rhode-Island affords another example. The very acts, in which Dorr was engaged, refute his own pro- position. But, by what right did he employ arms at all ? If his Constitution " was founded in right and justice," he was inhibited from resorting to arms, and obligated to apply to the Tri- bunals of his country, " to whose ordeal,"> the Editor of the Herald tells us the great body of the Suffrage party, was willing to submit. The proposition itself, transposes the order of things, and makes " a failure of arrns," an actual aggression. The seige tipon the Arsenal, makes folly of his own hypothesis \ The Constitution then was overthrown, not onlyby/orfc of arras, but, by a failure of arms wrongly used — a result exactly the reverse of the one asserted I Resignation is a defeasible right in any officer. I admit resigna- tions of its mernbers, under an established government, do not '^per S€" overthrow it. They suspend its organization for the time being only. The remedy is a neio election of new officers by the people. But, in the organization of a new Government where the people fail or refuse to make a Jicw election, the resignation of its officers does overthrow the Constitution, as effectually as a Charter of a body cor- porate is forfeited and overthro\Yn,, by nonuser, or a failure in com- plying with its provisions. Although the proposition may be partially correct in an established government, yet, it is not so in the sense he used it, nor in the case to which he applied it. 3T CONSTirrTlON ABANDONED BY ALL. I'lie refusal of the people to make a new election, and to supply tiie places of those resigned, as provided in Article 5-(), Section r>-{\, of his Constitution, viz : " Yacancies may he fdled hy a new elec- tion," not only approved their resignation, but coxijirnud their ahan-. jlonment of the Government ! This astounding admonition of the people, (which he admits, he knew on the 2 1st of May, previous,) whose soverti