HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/spctdsc0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
THE SUPREME COURT AND DrED SCOTT.
An opinioni not. nding authority) unlko the cate called for its exprostionf-
Owrot! vs. Curoll. 10 ]ncar'dis S. f. Rcports.
SPEECH
HON. DANIEL W. GOOCi-, OF MASS,
fDelivered in the U. S. 1HDu'se of Represen tat ives, May 3, 1860.
Mr. couit1t Histened with nmell interest case, already rered to, or others, sitting in
to the ohble d eloquen:t nseeck of the penti- their plaen, nmiht, when times and the for-
man fronm orth C. tolina fif-. Brn] last even- unes of political prie: had ehanged, expiress
m in wih be teed us, nd rnre spot other vu.ced opitis. perhaps k1s satisfctory
the :mn :ou ta :b1:sotte, to accept the opt- <tod gratefal to the iiU th.
ns given in the Uroti Scot caeo by aa of the I <~ not weonder at his aj hension and I
ges of the Sup remse earet of the Cunte comel to the court and the cocr the notice
$rnee, in reraion to the oonstitutionaiit of tho which he here givee, that the south will not ree-
ilomi comapromie, as it j udiciad &cislou of anine the vuitdity of the decision of any pai-.
that quetior., i:di:T rienon an od the people cat question by that court, unions it shill be lute
of the ho o :anoutry. I was v:holly u:hie to the dectison .i the Dhel scott case, sat1sfactory
agre withi t in his Irearsne or conclusi. tothen. An opinio~ntrdecision of the Spreme
Ito assuasd flhat that sjoen.:v was legitimiattly (lurttof t.he United Slt sts, obtained by anypaty,
befor: the wnr for dehion,. end ceene to the or thr any l:tirpone which iopir i the: lighteet
:-0ch: ron thnt the opittun : et: !e by the degree etn:i ieboi thre \visdomn integrity, i-
loiority of the. jde, in ach:tlo: to it. onaght to > ptality,::nd toneloi froot scctiooal erpolitical
beg reaied as blurting autharity biy the (on- biat, of Bthf hi. h tei.auai, it purchase at art
pass of the Lnited $nates and alt coed :itinen. u tt price.
e leo listened3 to the speech of the gn tle:Cen Mr. Chiruuan, I <deny the a.ssertion of these
from Alabama, (Mv. Unvrj vi few weels ago, gentlenen, that the not ot (.ongress prohibiting
ishich attracoted markedn attroin, and wil hel eltery ins the Territories has been adj miged to
meuenohered hr tho CIommithee, in whith, in be Ottcositiral and void. I know that, irn
nealingon tht eaicr he sai: the tired ticolt rose, ni< of the juidges expressed
tor concurrd in the opinion that that act was
kvvlvIxesC 1a eesrete uncoasttttuiona ha: I itav tn te reesression
tilotit ob't~lerI '~ ,'arsai-~Us Pe 'st~of opilnion, end no part of the decision. Thero
ThzxI~ V'xvw4nutyniod~.. 1 IMI sttttnd pdis or unay be, as every 1nwyr ail ervry intel-
sot.Tte~ta aria te rel~'pne~o ~eerc~t r ient maen known, a wide dnfierece betwveea the
vnsfI~tsr ld n iip Wl t o hyttatt. TItIiitaagopinions of the judges in stating the reasott for
~~aocamra5,13Isrotu-otan41041t15ntI uta~, thIbir coinclusions -the arguments fromt the
tI tI n , {encrh-an the po ni pim iplen of Law ad-
. . ]it at
ni : i. n derision of the It is not
ttr.~rt W~~e5 t' nlt~nrl--r steatr livotys true that the argumsent from the bench
'ni pounl in :l its parts, more than the argu]mena t
WIS~r ta itepO~mitMi, ltllil frme io l4IU~at the ber; and lie who utistakos the argunment,
IsaIIa~ SLOSla 5, rflellgt~i~i~tgi~'Illaractelfor the decision, and en:Comds what is soil with
Vt' ~ ~ ~ 1 iel3tr t1 ]A lal lil tfeneortItttee e
I aj t what is aIjuietel, any dd tiat e ba kearned
r~tlt0IItI5S 1 is 1: e-is ote Ganuttl.1ofj niec hao - law Than good. The decision of a
The gnenan from Alabama [Mtr. Cuenu corva]ecrrcadmn o h e~n
eesas to say, I tear 'there judges, even wh.en they gvnfrta eiinivSad ayo h
<k :oinnyfavor: and wvhen~towdrds the eoseof inoscreedronis.tInbnomns
his spteech, he said. 4 History is ftul of instanees aus rted hn o ~eogsfaorl
of jsdicial aubserviency, andr political opithions vrn ifttSo~etoentivie rlh
often control judicial conduct, I tel t asiured dcaotftecaebfr ht.Temsaht
thaithe had serious apprehensions that the judges Jln baadta ti h dcoaodotg
who hd exressd th opiionsin te Prd xprtt t a pinin one qal~ uetions ot inle indh
Reproduced with permission from the University of Illinois at Chicago](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/spctdsc0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)