William* v*. Ash, 1 Howard, 1; Rhode* va. Bell, 2 Howard, 397. It is intended to ei labliah, by these authorities, that the same tribunal which decreed the Dred Scott eaie against the citizenship of the negro, admit ted the point in permitting him to be a plaffi tiff in the cases cited. This conclusion is not warranted by the premises, and ia found ed on an erroneous impression of the* powers and jurisdiction of the Court in which the errors, complained of, originated. 'Those cases wers not taken from any United Stales court existing withih the limits of any of the sovere igu Slates of this confederacy, but arose in a United States court, bokfen in and for the District of Columbia, in the county of Washington. The courts of the United Slates, within the limits of the several States, oro courts of limited jurisdiction. With some exceptions, not material to the ques tion, io order to sustain an action in these tribonals, it is necessary that the plaintiff thould be a citizen of a different Slate from the one in wbicli the action is brought. If he be not a citiz'r of a different Stale, tbe State courts have jurisdiction; for the respee livo Stale* have the general powers of sov ereignty within their own limits. But the United States courts, when sitting within the District of Columbia, or within any of the Territories, are courts of unlimited jurisdic tion. No State sovereignty exists there to interfere with their jurisdiction. Such Uni ted States conns have, therefore, *ll the pow ers ot the Slate court* and the United Stales court* combined, subject only to the inherent powers granted to them by the act of Con gress which created them. It follows, that it is not necessary, in any United Slates court, either within the District of Columbia, or within any Territory, for tbe plaintiff either in aver, or prove, that he is a citizen of any State, or of the United States. He may main tain his action in such courts without being a citizen. A nego may, therelore, maintain a suit in the United Slates court for the Dis trict of Columbia. No question of citizen ship can arise to defeat the jurisdiction. The caves cited in the majority report, where ne groes have been permitted to maintain ac lions at law, are all from the District of Co lumbia. They have, therefore, no applica tion, whatever, to the question. They utter ly fail to prove ths doctrine for which they are cited. No one, having a proper acquaint ance with the constitution of our National and Slate governments, would present them tor the purpose of proving 'hat a negro ia a citizen of the United States, competent to maintain an sction in s court where such citizenship was necessary to give jurisdic tion. After a careful examination of the whole subject, we are forced lo conclude, that a npgro, free or slave, is not a citizen of the United States within the intent and meaning of the 2d section of the 4 h article ol the constitution. Guided by the "past hietory" of our government and enlightened by the "judicial precedent'' enumerated, the minor ity of our committee clearly recognize Ihe wisdom and sound policy of the recent de cision of ihe United States Sopreme Court in reference to tbe first point raised in this is sue. 2. The second question decided by the Coart, i Mwceptlble of just as clear and logical demonstration. It i necessary for us ait this time, to enter into any examination of the rise and progress of negro slavery in the United States. How it caine here, or what is its moral or political influence upon society, are matters with which we have nothing to do. That it exists in fifteen Stales in this Union, is an indisputable fact, and that the right of property in a slave is recog nized hy the Constitution and guaranteed to every State, is just ns positively settled and established. "This," says Chief Justice Ta ney, "is in language 100 plain to be misun derstood." In taking a historical view of this question, we find thai in England, this particular point engaged (he attention of the courts as fir back as the'year 1749. At that period Lord Chancellor HarJwicke,silting in a high court of chancery, ItelJ, that "a slave comipg from the West Indies, either with or without his matter, to Great Britain, doth not become free, and that his master's property or right in him, is not thereby determined or varied." The next case adjudged in the English courts, was lite celebrated Somerset case, in which Lord Mansfield delivered the famous opinion that has counseled his name inseparably with that important trial. The facts in this causes which may be found at length in 20 Howell', State Trials, -I—SO, are by no means the , same which occur in the Dred Scott issue.— Somerset, a negro s'ave, raised in Virginia, was taken by his master to England, and while in Loudon, where black slavery did not exist, on a writ of habeas corpus, was set at liberty hy Lord Mansfield. "His Lord atiip," says an intelligent writer upon this subject, "discharged htm in England under ihe local law of that country. As lo whether Somerset would have been entitled to his discharge if he bad r.ot been taken from England into slave territory, was not before the court. He did not pretend to decide whether slavery, under such circumstances, wonld have re-attached, because that ques tion could not be raised upon the facts."— Again, we find lltia point reviewed in the case of the alave Grace, before the H'.gh Ad mirality Court of Euglaod, ahd with Lord Stowel on the bench, reperled in 2 Hazzard's British Admiralty Reps. Tbe facia wete substantially as-follows: ' Grace Vas held as a alave io the island of Antigua, and was taken to London by Iter mistress, Mrs. Allen, as her servant. — Mrs. Allen, on her return from London to Antigua, look Grace with her. Under this state of facts, proceedings were instituted against Mr. Allen in the Vice Court of Ad miralty of Antigua, charging him with hav ing unlawfully imported as a slave, from Great Britain, into the island, a free subject of his majesty, against the statute. The Vice Court of Admiralty decided, that Grace was not free hy reason of ber visit to England, and gave judgment for the defendant, where upon an appeal was taken to the High Court of Admiralty, of England. That court sus tained the decision, and gave judgment for defendant with ooste." In pronouncing (be decision of the court, Lord Stowel said; "The objection, therefore, which consti tute* the foundation of this suit, and the ground of unlawful treatment, Is, that she was ■ free luhjecl,of Ills majesty, and under that character unlawfully imported as a slave, and was so treated. Now, this averment must be proved. * * # # jf she cannot plead with truth that she is a free subjeot, there ia no ground for complaint.— In her being treated as a slave, her rights were not violated, and she has no injured rights to represent. It may be a misfortune that * slave;4aing so, she, in the prea enl cdnititulion of society, had no right to be treated oilier wise. "The sole giound upon which it appears lo have been asserted (that she is free) is, that she had been resident in England some time, as a servant waiting upon her mistres?; but without,tho enjoyment of any manumis sion that could alone deliver her from the character of a slave she carried with Iter when she left Antigua; for I think it demon strable that she could derive no character of freedom that could entitle ber to maintain a suit like tbia, founded upon a claim of pei maner.t freedom merely by having been in England, without manumission. * * This suit, therefore, fails iu tie foundation. She was not a free person. # # # If she depends upon such a freedom, con veyed by a mere residence in England, she complains of a violation of right she posses sed no longer than whilst she resided in England, but which totally expired when that resilience ceased, and she was imported into Antigua." ' It cannot be denied that this opinion fore shadowed the important decision in the Died Scott case. Grace was a slave in Antigua- Scott was a bouUsmau iu Missouri. Return ing (torn England, the moment she set her foot upon the soil of her native island, her former servile condition re-attached lo her parson—taken back lo the state in which he had lived a slave, it was held that he could not claim the privileges ar.d immunities of a freeman under the lex loci of Missouri. In the interesting ' Life and Letters" of the late Judge Story, (vol. 1. p. 552 ) may Be discovered an entire approval of Lord Slow el's decision, which coming from so eminent must carty with it overwhelming force and conviction. In answer to several letters addressed to liirn by Lord Stowel, in 1828 (immediately after the decision was rendered aud courting his opinion of the case,) Judge Story replied as follows: Salf.m, near Boston, Sept. 22, 1828. My Lord —l have ihe honor lo acknowl edge the receipt of yonr letters of January and May last, the former of which reached me in the latter part of the spring, and the latter quite recently. * * * # 1 have read with great attention your judg ment in the slave case from the Vice Ad miralty Conrl of Antigua. Upon the fullest cmifideraiion which 1 have been able to give the subject, I entirely concur in your views. If I hail been called upon lo pro nounce a judgment in a like case, I should certainly have arrived at the same result, though 1 migtn not have heen able to pres ent tbe reasons which lead to ii in such a striking and convincing manner. It appears to .Tie that the decision is impregnable. In my native slate, (Mass.) the state of slavery is nflt recognized as legal; and yet if a slave should come hither and afterwards return to his own home, we should think that the lo cal law would reattach upon him, and that his servile character would be reintegrated. "I have' had occasion to know that your judgment has been extensively read in Amer ica (where questions of this nature ire not of unfrequenl discussion) and I never have heard any other opinion but that of approba tion of it expressed among the profession of tbe law. I cannot but think that upon ques tions of this sort,as well as general maritime law, it were well if the common lawyers had studied a little more extensively the principles of public a civil law, and had looked beyond their own municipal jurispru dence. * f * "I remaio, with the highest respect, your most obedient servant, JOSEPH STORY." To Right Hon. Wm. Lord Stowel. In examining "judicial precedent" in Ihe United States, upon this question, numerous authorities may be found lo sustain the mi nority of your committee. Chancellor Kent, in (lie notes to his commentaries, vol. 2, p. 277, informs us "the law of Illinois enforces the comity due to traveldts in passing over the stale by protecting his property, aud es pecially his slave, whom he brings with him for lemporaiy use, and the slave does not thereby constitutionally become free." [lVil lard vs. 7he People, 4 Scammon, 461 ] He also informs us that "in some of the slave holding States, if a slave from such a stale goes lawfully into a non-slaveholdiug State and acquires a domicil there with bis master, or is emancipated there by his master, he becomes emancipated and ceases to he a slave on his return. But if he be carried there for a temporary purpose and returns, hisstate of slavery is resumed.— (Lunsford vs. Coqujl lon, 14 Martin's Louisiana Rept. 405. 2 Mar shall's Ken. Rep. 467. Biuckmore vs. Phill. 7 Yerger's Rep. 452 ) In the Kentucky case of Strnder et. al. vs. Graham, (to Howard, 83,) where it was claimed that slaves sent from Kentucky into Ohio fur a temporary residence became free, it was held by the Supreme Court of the Uni ted Stales, that "under the 25th section of Hie judiciary act, this court has no jurisdiction over the following question, viz : 'Whether slaves who had heen permitted by their mas ters lo pass occasionally from Kentucky into Ohio acquired thereby a right In freedom af ter their return to Kentucky 1' The laws ol Kentucky alone could decide upon Ihe do mestic and social condition of the persons i domiciled within its territory, except so far as the powers of the Slates in this respect are restrained or duties and obligations imposed upon them by Ihe constitution of the United States." And the Chief Justice says "there is nothing in Ihe Constitution of the United Slates that can, in any degree, control the law of Kentucky upon this subject The conditior. of- the negroes, therefore, as to freedom or slavery, after their return, depended altogeth er upon tbe laws of that State, and could not be influenced by tbe lews of Ohioi" In endeavoring to establish their position the majority of the committee rely upon "thfr leading case" of Rachel vs. Martin, (4 Mis souri Rep. 330, June term, 1836.) In refer ence to it they elate that it ia "substantially I the same in every particular as the Dred Scott esse," Every one who examine* the case cited, will find that the majority err in apply ing its principles to the Dred Scott decision. The facts arc not the same, and the principles involved are by no means identical. In Ra chel va. Martin, it appears that J. B. VV. Stock ton, an officer in the army of the United Stat**; raiding at Fort Snelling, in the Mis souri Territory, wherein slavery was not pro- the Missouri compromise sent into a slave State, aud purchased the slave Rachel. From tbe State of Missouri sho was taken to the military post, aforementioned, and held there by her master as his "servant." Stock ton lived iu a free territory when he bought Iter, and never held her under the local laws of u slave Stale. "In this case," says Judge Mc- Girk, in delivering the opinion of the pourt, "the officer lived in the Missouri tqjritory at the lime he bought the slave, he sent to a slaveholdiog territory and procured her; this was his voluntary act, and done without any other roason than that of convenience, and he and those claiming under him must be hold ,en to abide the consequence ot introducing slavery both in Missouri territory and Michi gan, contrary to law." No one will dispute the soundness of these conclusions: but in the Dred ScpU case a different state of facts oppears on the record. Scott was held by bis master in Missouri, ur.der the local laws of that Slate, which recognized the institution.of slavery, wa* removed to a free territory where his master temporarily resided, and was after wards taken back to the slave Stale of Mis souri. Stockton, or those who hold nnder him, could not rest their claim on the lex loci of Missouri, (or he was a resident of a free territory when Rachel became bis property. Tho principle decided in the Dred Scott case did not arise in Rachel vs. Martin, and like the point in the Somerset case, has no bearing upon the question. The Judge, in deciding the case, after reviewing the application of the ordinance of 1787 to the question before him, remarked—"ln the case of Lagrangvs. Menard the court will raise other exceptions than those expressed in the ordinance; the case of Lagrang was on i where the owner lived in Minois and had his slave employed in Missouri, attd the slave made occasional visits to his master's house in Illinois ; the court declared that this did not work an emancipation." We, therefore, dismiss this branch of the subject, and after a carefbl and elaborate investigation ol the decision of the Supreme Court, we beg leave lo record our unqualified assent lo the vilal principles it contains aud the great doctrines it enunci ates. Having thus disposed oT Ihe two leading points in the Drod Scott decision, we might leave Ihe question without furthpr comment, were it not for the unwarrantable position as sumed by the majority of the committee in the conclusion of their report. They com plain upon the questions of tbe unconstitu tionality of the Missouri compromise and the effect of the Removal of Dred Scott into a free Slate where his master hail ■ temporary resi dence, the court traveled beyond the caes before them, and had no jurisdiction ; and therefore they argue, that upon these points.! the decision was "extra judicial, corom non judice, inoperative and void." All of the judges, however, (McT.ean and Curtis ex cepted) seem lo have regarded these points as essentially involved in lite case, and even Judge McLean, in his dissenting opinion takes the ground that tbe plea to jurisdiction, that is the pne involving ci'izenship, was not before the court; becuuse the demurrer to the plea of jurisdiction had been sustained in the court below ; and the defendant, that is the master, had pleaded over and justified the tiespass on the ground that the plaintiff teas his slave. On this plea lite case was decided against the slave in the court below, and up on U the writ of error in behalf of Dred Scott was then prosecuted. Upon this view of Ihe case Judge McLean proceeds to argue, as does Judge Curtis, tbe very points which the ma jority of tbe committee complain of as having been extra judicially decided. The fact is apparent that upon the plead ings in this case, as taken up to the Supreme Conrt of the United States, tbe naked ques tion of citizenship was not as necessarily in volved as were the other parts in regard lo Ihe slavery of the plaintiff. As appears by the record, the defendant, who was master, denied by plea in abatement, this jurisdiction ol the Circuit Court of the United States, on the ground that the plaintiff "is a negro of Afriqan blood, and were brought into this country and sold as slaves," and, therefore* Ihe plaintiff "is not a citizen of the State of Missouri." To Ibis plea the plainlifTdemur red and the court sustained the demurrer.— Thereupon, the defendanl pleaded over ?rid justified ihe trespass, solely on the assump tion that the plaintiff, Dred Scott, and his family, were in fad his negro slave*. Upon these pleading the court went lo jury, ami the only question be'ore them was ilia slavery or freedom of the plaintiff". The jury decided that he and his family were slaves, and the vvril of error then prosecuted was not based upon the question of citizenship, or jurisdib lion of the court, for that had been decided in his favor, but upon the instruction to tbe jury, that his temporary removal with bis master, first into a free Slate and next into a free Territory, did not work his emancipation against ihe laws of Missouri, to wbieb Stale be and his family had returned. This latter point, involving as it did the questions of the constitutionality of the Mis souri compromise and the right of tbe master over tbe slave under our social compact, was more immediately and necessarily involved than the issue as to citizenship or jurisdiction, and therefore, if any part of the decision is to be regarded as "obiter dictum," it is rather the latter than the former. Indeed the whole conrl seem lo have felt the necessity and im portance of disposing of the very poins com plained of, and by none are they argued more carefully and earnestly than by the dissent ing judges. Tbe closing sentence in the pub lished opiuion of ihe Chief Justice is that "the plaintiff was not a citizen of Missouri and wo * still a slave, and therefore, had not a right to sue in a court of the United States." Tbe Court entertained, as they were obliged by the pleading and every rule of practice, the question of slavery at well aa that of cit izenship, and their (Incision upon that point, ao vital in its character and to controlling in ill effects npon the future destiny of our peo ple, will stand and be recognized at of at much, and even more authority than itt opin ion npon the other. v The majority of the committee have insul ted the memory of Tbomae Jwßerson by in voking his great name and quoting his com manding authority, in favor of the treasonable sentiments contained iff the resolutions as reported. In ihis they have only imitated the gross wa nt of candor which has so recently permitted the opposition to justify their feeble attacks upon the Constitution snd the Union under the sanction of the great men of the Revolution who labored so successfully to establish both. The majority have quoted the language, but not the meaning of Jeffer son. For npon reference to the letters from which garbled extracts bave been taken, it appears that the illustrious founder of De mocracy was inveighing in eloquent and for cible, terms against that growing spirit of cen tralization of federal assumption of power, which /torn the days of the Virginia and Ken tucky resolutions of 1798, to the present lime, the democratic parly has strenuously resisted; and never so successful as in the reoenl Pres idential contest, when the disregard of Stale Rights and strict constitutional construction was carried by the Republican parly to the most dangerous and irettbnsMe extremes.— The opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States, which Thomas Jefferson then deprecated, seemed to lend the sanction of that high tribunal to federal interference in purely Slate affairs. Bill happily for the perpetually of this Un ion, his gloomy forebodings have not been justified by the result. For not only has the Supreme Court itself been controlled by wi ser and more mature counsels, but the federal government with all its power and influence, has recognized and suttsined to the fullest extent, the sacred justice of Slate Rights, and placed upon safe and unassailable ground the vital piniciple of POPULAR SOVCRRIGNTVin the Territories—in itself, only an extension and necessary application of the former. And if the sage of Monticello were now alive and in our midst—if he could dwell , upon the proud triumphs of the Democratic parly, so true, so constaut, and so faithful to the Con stitution as it came from itsf-amers—his dark presages as to federal encroachments upon the sovereign rights of the separate States, would give place to bright and prophetic vis ions of the permanency and grandeur of this confederate Republic. In conclusion, the minority of your com mittee hsve no fears that the bred Scott de cision will not be sustained and upheld by the calm good sense of the American people. In the frenzied outburst of defeated sectional ism, tones of unmeasured denunciation may be hurled against it by tho party whose hopes it destroys and whoso principles it over whelms. Bui in Ihe future, as in the past, the groat mass ol our people will be true to that high tribunal, as they have ever been to the Constitution and the Union. And if ever tho broken fregmenta of constitutional liberty strew our pathway—if il.e exultant tread of internal loes should evefecho through our deserted halls and linger among (lie brilliant trophies of our national greatness —it w ill be in that fatal hour, when the strength and bind ing force of the judiciary shall be forevet lost in the treasonable resistance of degenerate factions. WILLIAM H. WF.LSH, JAMES H. WALTON. I May 11, 1857. STAR OF THE NORTH. R. W. WEAVER, EDITOR. Ulootnsburg) Wednesday, Mtiy 27, 1857. Democratic Nomination*. FOR GOVERNOR, WILLIAM F. PACKER, of Lycoming County. FOR CANAL COM MISS TONER, NIAIROD STRICKLAND, of Chester County. THE LEGISLATURE adjourned sine die on last j Friday, and Mr. Ent came home on Friday I evening. The proposition to have the stale guarantee the payment of $3,000,000 to the Sunbury & Erie Railroad Company was lost. The bill to repeal the act erecting a State Road from this place to Laport was defeated ' in the Senate by a strict party vote, after hav ing passed the House. The bill to extend Third Street in Bloomeburg was also lost in the Senate after having passed the House. The session was one of 16 weeks, and nearly 900 bills passed, among which is the greatest uumb.er of bank charters ever paseed at one session of the Legislature, at least since (he famous bank explosion of 1837-38. Nearly at the close of the session, a com munication was received from Mr. Maflil saying that the recent floods on the Upper North Branch Canal bad taken away 315 feet in length of the Horse Race Dam, allowing the whole water of the river to pass through it. Some $30,000 would probably be requir ed to repair the injury. That sum was ap propriated for the repair. THE DANVILLE TRAGEDY. —Dr. Simiogton last week returned from Philadelphia with the necessary chemicals, retorts and other ap paratoe to lest poison. The contents of the stomach of the late Mrs. Clark were then an alyzed, and, in the judgment of five of the physicians present, arsenic was discovered beyond the shadow oj a dould. The oontents of the stomach of the late Mr. Twiggs will be submitted to a similar analysis. Ey The Report of Mr. Welsh on the Dred Scott case presents a forcible view of the rea soning on the points involved, in such style and manner as to be adapted for popular cir culation. The aubjeot has been much per verted and abused, and it is important that every man who hasa vote should get correct and intelligent views about it. He can do tbi* by reading (be report we publish to-day, and ita importance and clearuess will justify the large apace we give to it. BP The gee at Danville give out last woek about 9 o'clock each evening. The makers complain of bad coal. The Apportionment 11111. The bill as passed was arranged or com promised by Henry D-Foater on the part of the Democrats and Mr. Jordan on the part of the Opposition. The only excuse for agreeing to it lays in the fact that the Gov ernor and Senate were with the Opposition, and the House in rather doubtfnl condition. Under these circumstances the bill is per haps as good as could have been procured, if the fates are not against us there will be a Democratic majority in both branches of the next Legislature. After that Philadel phia will be re-districted, and the chances are about even in the State; which is a. shame, because there is a large Democratic majority on the popular vote. Our district, as usual faros about the worst of all; and we have a surplus of taxables in the district over both tb&£euatorial and Rep resentative ratio. For a Senator the ratio is 17,011, while our district of Columbia, Mon tour, Northumberland and Snyder contains 18,82*; The first three counties 14,679 which ought to have entitled them to a Sen ator mucbAather than the 28,168 taxables of Lancaster should entitle it to two Senators. Where several counties are joined in a dis trict the discrimination ought always to be in their favor, and where one county is en titled to several Senators the discrimination should be against it. Lancaster and Leban on were formerly a district with two Sena tors, and have now together 35,160 taxa bles, which would have given 17,680 to each Senator, a number less than is in the district fixed for us. But because Lancaster and Lebanon were Opposition counties they were allowed to spead, and a Democratic district was crowded. This seems to have been the general rule in forming the bill. The Opposition district ofßutler and Beavor has only 14,601 taxa bles, and the other one of Indiana and Arm strong only 13,103; in both instances less than our three counties of Columbia, Mon tour and Northumberland contain. The Democratic counties' of Northampton and Lehigh are crowded together for a district, though they contain 21,827 taxables. But in the Representative district we are still more wronged. Our four counties of Montour, Columbia, Sullivan and Wyoming contain 12,264 taxables, while tho ratio for a member is 5,876. The three counties of Montour, Columbia and Sullivan contain 9,757 taxables; which ie a larger number than is found in the double district of Dau phin with 9,024, of Butler with 8,500, ol Potter and Tioga with 8,763, or of Bradford with 9,714. But these are Opposition coun ties, and therefore the favor to them and the injustice to us. If three counties are united in a district there is certainly more reason to let them be below the ratio than where one county has two members, or where only two counties are united. Bat tho Opposition evidently went upon i the principle of "divide and conquer." If they could not here form an anti-Democrat ic district, they could at least make one clumsy and cumbrous; in which, from the large number of counties, there would nat urally be a greater chance for mischief on account of discord, disunion, and jealousy between rival ronntie* wilt rival eandltlatee of the party in the majority. Wo have no objection to Snyder or Wy oming counties as a part of our district, be we know excellent men in both of them.— We promise ourselves pleasure and profit from the new political associations which our county thus forms from the centre of the slate almost to the Northern line. But we. do object to having districts made cumbrous and clumsy with four counties, when each district ought only to have embraced three to be fair and just with tire others of the State. Republicanism Is Abolitionism. When Republicans grow ashamed of the infamous sentiments which some of their party utter they try to evade responsibility by saying that the Anti-Slavery party is a differ ent thing from the Republican parly. We say it is the same, and the wicked men who lately abused their country and reviled tbeir God at New York were Republicans. We gave extracts last week from their doings in which "Rev. Mr. Frothingham thought civil war or a dissolution ol the Union was the only hope of emancipating the slave." . To show that this man was ol the Repub lican party we go a little further in the pro ceedings and find the following : "Rev. Mr. Frothingham from New Jersey, deplored the defeat of the Republican early: "It had a candidate (he said) brave gener ous, chivalric, of spotless character, with a foreign reputation. The cause of freedom never had such combination of favorable cir cumstances." Put that in your Black Republican pipe and stnoke it, before you attempt to deny that yon are of the Abolition party. And hide yonr face in shame before the honest, patriotic men whom you last fall altempted to drag into a treasonable vole for your clan. Comt In Montour County. Court was held in Montour county on last week, and was so fortunate as not to find a single case on the civil list for trial. The no torious Henry Warner was tried on two in dictments for grand larceny. On one he was convicted and on the other acquitted for want of necessary evidence. In the first case a motion for a new trial is pending until Sep tember term. Several persons were tried for selling liquor to minors and on Sunday, and all of litem, were sent to the county jail and fined from S2O to $75, according to the aggravation or mitigation of the case. In the whole county 16 tavern licenses were granted, and 3 for restaurants. Three appli cants for tavern licenses, 6 for eating house license and 6 for license to sell liquor in a store were unsuccessful. No license was granted to sell liquor in any store, and many of the most respectable citizens of Danville had signed remonstrances against granting any such licenses. Court adjourned on Wed nesday morning. w Governor Pollock has appointed Silas E. Walton, of Berwick, an Aid to his Excel lency, with the rink of Lieut. Colonel. Where It the Pope t The Unitarian Conference >1 Alton, Illinois, lately paaeed a resolution declaring that the Constitution of the United Statni waa a fail ure, and that the decision of the Supreme Coon in the Dred Scott case has no binding power. It is said that in old limes the Pope of Rome used to claim authority for hit cborch in temporal affairs, but aa his h* v e been enough scolded for such impuoence'it was hardly to be expected that in Know- Nothing America there would be Protestants to follow his example. It was said too that the Pope pretended to absolve people from their obligations sad j obedience to the temporal authorities. But let these Know-Nothings look to Illinois, and they will find there a bold attempt to set up an imperjum in imperio; and a most infamous attempt to instigate lawless anarchy, ff the citizen can be thus absolved from observance of one legal decision, he may be taught to disregard the whole municipal code, and to follow only bis passions and lost*. This is Sewardism or that "higher law" doctrine which forms the whole basis of political Re publicanism. This Spirit of Evil knows noth ing of the structure of the human mind or of human government—ignores the infirmity of human nature, and arrogates to every de generate child of frail humanity the perfec tion of human reason. It claims that every MoKim end Warner may interpret the law to suit his own mind; and that a conference of priests may whenever Ibey please abro gate the Constitution of the Republic or an nihilate the Supreme Court with a bull of excommunication. Surely it is no wonder i that the people rebuked the fell and foul spirit last tail. These Republican priests in Illinois evidently acted more with the bitter and malicious bate of Douglass before their eyes than in the spirit of Him who said "ren der unto Ctßtar the things which are Cmsar'a." 1 be New Apportionment Bill. On last Wednesday ihe two Houses at Har risburg passed the following apportionment bill wliicb will hold for seven years : SENATORIAL DISTRICTS. Ciiy of Philadelphia, 4 Chester and Delaware, I Mon'gornery, I Bucks, I I-ehigh and Northampton, I Berks, 1 Schuylkill, I Carbon, Monroe, Pike and Wayne, I Bradford, Susquebautu,Sullivand and Wy oming, 1 f.uzerne, I Tioga, Potter, McKean and Warren, 1 Clinton, Lycoming, Centre and Union, I Montour, Northumberland, Columbia and Snyder, 1 Cumberland, Snyder; Perry, Juniatia and Mifflin, 1 Dauphin and Lebanon, 1 Lancaster. 2 York, 1 Adams, Franklin and Fulton, 1 Somerspt, Bedford and Huntingdon, 1 Blair, Cambria and Clearfield, 1 Indiana and Armstrong, 1 Westmoreland and Fayette. I Washington and Gteene, 1 Allegheny, 2 Beaver and Butler, I j Lawrence, Mercer and Venango, I E'ia &ud Crawford, 1 Clarion, Jetlnrsnn, Fores: and Elk, I REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICTS. Phila. City districted 17 Cumberland & Par- Delaware county, 1 ry, 2 Chester, 3 Adams, 1 Montgomery, 3 Franklin & Fulton, 2 Bucks, 2 Bedford & Somerset, 2 Noilhampton, . 2 Huntingdon, 1 Lehigh and Carbon, 2 Blair, 1 Monroe and Pike, 1 Cambria, 1 Wayne, 1 Indiana, 1 Luzerne, 3 Westmoreland and | Susquehanna, 1 Armstrong, 3 Bradlord, 2 Fayette, 1 Wyoming, Sullivan, Green, 1 Columbia &Mon- Washington, 2 tour, 2 Allegheny, 5 Lycoming and Clin- Boaver& Lawrence, 2 ton, 2 Butler, 2 Centre, 1 Mercer & Venango, 2 Mifflin, 1 Clarion and Forest, 1 Union, Snyder and Jeflerson, Clearfield, | Juniata, 9 Elk and M'Kean, 2 Northumberland, 1 Crawford and War- Schuylkill, 3 ren, 2 Dauphin, 2 Erie, 2 Lebanon, 1 Potter and Tioga, 2 Berks, 3 Lancaster 4 100 York, 2 The following is the vote by which the bill passed the House : YEAS —Messrs. Abrsms, Anderson, Augus tine, Babcock, Backhouse, Backus, Beck, Calhonn, Campbell, Chase, Cleaver, Craw ford, Dickey, Enl, Fausold, Foster, Hamel, Harper, Hill, Hillegas, Hoffmen, of Berks; Hoffman, of I.ebanon ; Imbrie, Jacobs, Jen kins, Johns, Johnson, Herr, Lebo, Longaker, Menear, Maugle, McCalmont, Moorbead, Mummu, Musselman, Nichols, Nicholson, Nunnemacher, Penrose, Peters, Ramsey, of York; Sloan, Smith, of Cambria; Smiih of Centre; Smith, of Luzerne; Stevenson, To lan, Vail, Vickers, Voeghley, Wagonseller, Wintrode, Witherow, Wright—s6. NATS —Messrs. Arthur, Ball, Benson, Bish op, Bower, Brown, Carty, Eyster, Gibboney, Gildea, Hancook, Heins, Heistand, Hine, In ties, Kauffman, Knight, Leiaenring, Mcllvain, Pearson, Pownall, Purcell, Ramsey, of Phil adelphia ; Reamer, Reed, Roberts, Struthers, Rupp, Thorn, Vso Voorbeea, Walter, Wsrner, Wharton, WillUton, Yearsley, Zimmerman, Getz, Speaker—37. The Rfaln Line will not be Bold. We learn that some of the stockholders of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company will ap ply to the Supreme Court forao injunction to restrain that corporation from directly or indi rectly purchasing (he Main Line. Chas. R. Buckalew, Esq., of this place, and Henty D.! Foster, Esq., of Westmoreland, are engaged for ihe injunotioo; and from the former gen tleman we have learned the grounds upon which tbe application will rely. They are such as, we are confident, will prove impreg nable; and are very different from that one suggested by the correspondent of the Penn syloanian, but mucb stronger in a legal point of view. Messrs. Buckalew and Poster have the ability to present their case in all ite power to Ihe Supreme Court; aod the public will await the deoision of the matter with anitety and internet. 0T It is said that the McKim case has cost Blsir county $?5 00. A Gleam of Daylight. In the darkness, we are glad to find any ray of htJpe which may indicate a check upon the sale of the Main Line. The Har risburg correspondent of the Pennsylvanian gives the following, which we only fear ia too good to be true.: "The Msin Line bill has been signej by the Governor, and the works are already ad vertised for sale. The announcement of this hasty action on the part ol the Executive caused some excitement in town on Satur day evening, and it is generally believedlhal a sale, to be of any efTecl, cannot be made. I am informed that an application for an in junction against the transfer of the line will be made to the Supreme Court, and tome of the Judges have expressed the opinion pri vate that any property holder, on the portion* of the line proposed to be abandoned, ha* the right to make *uch application, and th* application once made will be granted, and will effectually bar a transfer for the present, if this is correct, the publio will observe that there are yet great difficulties in the way of the consummation of the objects of this biß. If the court issues an injunction against the transfer of these works, the whole (ob ject will naturally come before the next Leg islature, and therefore the sale of the Main Line bids fair to become an important ques tion in the approaching political campaign." To Tex Collectors- The Board of Commissioners of Sullivan County have passed the following resolutions: 1. Resolved, That we reqoire that Col-| lectors of County, State and Militia lax**, in the County, to pay in the taxes charged on their duplicates as follows: On the f2lh day ot June and the 11 tb day of September, what monies they shall then have collected, and make final settlement December 1 lib, 2. Resolved, That on failure of any of said Collectors to make payment at thotimes herein designated, we will proceed in accord ance with the act of Assembly to collect th* same at the earliest possible period. The post office fit Pealer's, in this co , liar been discontinued, as no person seemed anxioue to attend to it properly for the small profits, and the neighborhood can be pretty wall accommodated at other office. We at* tuld that nu application is made for a new of fice on the Stale Road at Mr. Howell's ator n, where the Asbury people and the neighbor: hood generally could be accommodated. W The Danville Democrat says Geo. Pea bod), the London millionaire has bought the Liberty Furnace property in Montour county, and it will probably be soon again put in op eration. ler The Executor of the McHenry estate alvertises soma valuable real estate lor sale. ff Several articles are crowded out to-day. O.ie on Utah and the Mottcons will appear next week. Ilollcwny's Ointment and fills. —The idea that cancer is incurable cannot be entertained liv persons who hnvn witnessed the effect of these lemedii-s on tins terrible disesse. The ointment penetrates the substance of the can cer, and reaches its minutest ramifications in th* m-ah, checking j.rograu and gradually restoring the pans ufTacleu to a sound condi tion, wnile the pills, acting upon the blood as a powerful detergent, destroy the seeds of the mslady in the circulation. The testimony on litis head is abundant and conclusive. WHITE TEETH, PERFUMED BREATH AND BEAUTIFUL COMPLEXION— can be ac quired by using the "Balm of a Thousand flowers." What lady or gentlemau would remain under the curse of a disagreeable breath, when by usiDg the "Balm of a Thou sand Flowers" a 9 a d.-rmifice, would not only render it sweet, but leave the teeth as white as alabaster? Many persons do not know their breath is bad, and the subject is to deli cate their friends will never mention it. Be ware of counterfeits. Be sure each bottle i* signed FETRIDGE & CO., N. Y. For sale by all Druggists. Feb. 18, 1867-6rn. On the 14 inst. by the Rev. J. A DeMuyer, ! Mr. GEO. W. SANDKRS, of Pine twp. Col. 00., and Mies ELIZABETH G. DOUOLABS, of Sulli van County. Mm - In Berwick, on the 18th inst., Mrs. HAS MET DIETERICK, wife of Capt. Jaoob W. Dietertck, aged about 35 years. In Derry township, Montour county, Penn aylvania, March l7ih, 1857, of typhoid pneu monia, Mr. SAMUEL W. LOWRIE, in the fifty sventh year of his age. BLOOMSBURQ OBCZDODOS, b£3%fC£>l3aO&- flfllE undersigned would in this way oall -*• the attention of the public to the Booh Store at the old stand, next door to the "Ex change Hotel," where at nil limes can be found a good assortment of books, including Bibles, Hymn Boeks, Prayer Books* Histories, Books of Poetry, Novels, and School Books ; also all kinds of stationary of the best quality. A considerable dednction made upon th* price ol School Books and Stationary to those who by to sell again. Just rrceived, a good assortment of WALL PAPER, which I would ask all to call and examine belore puchasingelsewhere. CAROLINF, CLARK, Successor to Jesse O. Clark. Bloomsburg, May 25, 1857,-lyr. TftI MMI NGS AND NOTIONS, fancy oVii elea, a good" assortment of Hosiery of the best quality; also gloves, milts, ba>kets, Ca bas, Combs, dress trimmings and linings sewing silk, thread, etc., etc., to be had nex door to the "Exchange." AMELIA D. WEBB. ! Bloomsburg, May 25, 1857. AN ASSORTMENT of confectionary, jew elry, Perfumery soaps, bail oils, &0., Pomades, to be bad at C. CLARK'S Book Store. 40000 JOI NT AND LAP SHINGLES IV/,UUU | or sa |„ al t | |e Arcade by May 27, '57. A. C. MENSCH. COTTON and Wool Carpst lor sale cheap at (be Areade by May 27,'67. A. C. MENSCH. MORTICED POSTS on hand aud tor tale at the Arcade by May 27. '57. A. C. MENS CH. t ¥X/OOD & COAL lor saleai the Arcade by I ** A C MENSCH.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers