=-----------------a-----

 COMMUNICATIONS. S.

For He Runner.

TUT Wg IWIFtCI' RnNrnNu11fr. Jan. 3lst. 1915.
{"newspaper_name": "The Arkansas banner.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 4958, "word_count": 894, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9682000279426575], "ccnet_perplexity": [684.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
COMMUNlCAI lONo, -

 For he Runner.

 BgNToNytLLE, Jan. 3lst, lS45.

 MgssRs. EDITORS = Being member ot the committee on the judiciary during the last session of the General Assembly of this State, and to whom was referred the report and re- solutions adopted by the Legislature of South Carolina, a copy of which was communicated to the Governor of this State, and by hlm to the Legislature, in justice 10 myself and my course upon these resolutions, deem 1t my duty to reply at least 10 the editorial which appeared in your paper of the 22d instant. Y ou, as the conductors of public journal, have perfect right to express your opinions upon all subjects, especially of public char acter; and trust you will indulge me Tn the few remarks l shall make in yindlcatlon oi my course and it may here be proper to remark, that had an opportunity been offered upon the introduction of the substitute oi Mir Roane. l should have given my reasons for my course before the Legislature, but was prevented from doing so by the previous question after Mr. Roane had concluded his remarks and no member of the majority oi the committee had an opportunity oi placing themselves in a proper light before the Legls- ature. In your editorial you state that the report of the committee is vague and non committal. To this opinion ] must be per mitted to except, for 1t seems to me that the second resolution of the committee breathes language that cannot be misunderstood; and so far from being uncertain, think the doe Urine set forth IS of quite certain character, and proclains the doctrine of State rights and State sovereignty to the fullest extent. As one of the authors of that report, l was ac- tuated by no other than the purest motives, and am as far from favoring the doctrine of abolitonism, as any man in the State, and would go as far to maintain State soyerelgn- ty, even though it had to be done at the point of the bayonet; and am always ready to take up arms for that purpose, when ne cessary. am southerner by birth, and under no consideration would do any act to favor the abominable doctrine of abolition ism; a Id in the language of the second re- solution reported by the committee, each State has a rightto exclude from her territory any individual whose presence may be dan gerous to the peace of her citizens. What stronger language could have been used to express the doctrine of State rights There Is no doctrine that delight more to dwell upon more than the principles of State sov- ereignty. on declare also in your editorial that the report and resolutions of the com mttee are unworthy the mind and hand of an American legislator, and favorable to the doctrine of aboitionsm. would be glad if you would point out which of the resolutions l fayors the doctrine of abolitionsm, for have not as yet been able to find it. The two first resolutions of MT. Roane's substitute are couched in almost the same language as that expressed by the two first resolutions report ed by the committee Then, from your re- marks. l am satisfied there is no abolition doctrine i'll them, as you approve of the sub stitute entire. Then, the presumption is, that you glean the idea from the third and last resolution reported by the committee If so. must be permitted to make few re- marks upon the character ot that resolution The only question Is, whether We will sub init our legislative acts to the test of consti- tutional scrutiny ?-if not, why have con stitution at all and if one act of the legisla- ture should be strictly compared with the constitution, why not another? Although we declared in that resolution that all legis- lative acts should be freely submitted to the test of constiutionalIy scrutiny. yet, in the preceding resolution, we declared that each State had a right to exclude from her territo- " any person whose presence might be dan gerous to the peace of her citizens. What more was necessary or proper for us 10 say on the subject? l conceye nothing more was necessary for us to say as representa- lives. My doctrine is, that it is proper to submit all laws to constitutional scrutiny without reserve, so long as we have con sttution for our guide. As an individual, l felt disposed to go as far as South Carolina did, or even farther, If 1t was possible to do so but acting as l was in the character of representative, went as far as l thought it was my duty to 90. But in making this brief statement of the motives which induced me to take the course did, do not wish to be understood as intending to cast any reAec- tions upon yourselves. or the majority of the legislature who rejected the report of the committee. am now done with the sub iect, and in conclusion l must be permitted to state, in justice to Col Fowler, that in committee he expressed as II uch hostile feel ings towards the abolition movements in the east, as any other member.

 Y ours, truly,

 A. B. GREENWOOD.

 For lie BaaRer

 FORTY ACRE PREPARATIONS FOR THE