Wisconsin Quotes
Although the two men differed on a very important issue, each admired the other and acquitted themselves politely throughout. Congress explicitly gave the President the powers that he had exercised and won the dispute. But Dixon had also won, and upheld the law as it existed until it was changed.
On March 20, 1854 a group of disaffected politicians met in a schoolhouse in Rippon, Wisconsin:. It was the birth of the Republican party.
Barstow the Democratic Governor who had no serious opposition in 1853 found himself challenged for reelection by Coles Bashford of the new Republican Party. The Board of Canvassers reported that Governor Barstow had won reelection but by less than 200 votes in the whole state. The Republicans charged that there had been fraud in some of the rural districts and petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court which ruled that nonexistent precincts had indeed voted for the Governor. The Barstow however refused to recognize the decisions of the court claiming that the court had no jurisdiction over the Board of Canvassers who were part of the executive branch. The Republicans held their own inauguration and two men claimed to be Governor. But the Governor claimed that the state constitution did not give the court any authority to deal with the crisis, He even called out the State Militia to maintain his office and intimidate the Supreme Court and keep the “other governor” from the state house. Nonetheless the court ruled that even the Governor had to obey the law and the Supreme Court would determine what the law was. Barstow finally “resigned.” See {587917} & {587914}.
She had petitioned for a recount of the close elections in Pennsylvania, and two other states, However, the arcane Pennsylvania election laws together with an inclination on the part of election officials in Pennsylvania not to do a recount, produced a process that was really ineffective as a check on the original vote and any errors that might ahve been made. In general, state election officials do not like recounts in Presidential elections. If the results were wrong and the stat's electoral votes should have gone to another, the politics of the state are destabilized and tust in the state election system is seriously eroded, and they are blamed. However, even if the results are not reversed, typically totals for a number of districts change and they are called upon to explain the discrepency which most often is attributed to weaknesses in the system which do not sufficiently eliminate human error, There are calls for investigations and the consequences continue, often for years. Most scientists studying the various state election processes, agree that some states systems are very weak, and there are many errors in elections, but they are rarely of sufficient magnitude toe change the results of the election. Reform of the system in many states and local areas becasue most politicans are reluctant to spemd more money on the election processes and system.
The State of Wisconsin was very much against slavery. Opposing the Fugitive Slave Act, the state passed a Personal Freedom Act under which Wisconsin officials refused to return fugitive slaves as required by the Fugitive Slave Act. The Wisconsin Courts upheld the Wisconsin law citing, among other things, States’ Rights. The Taney Supreme Court which was strongly pro-slavery (a majority of the justices were Southern slaveowners) then overturned Wisconsin’s law. Taney’s opinion said that if there was to be Federal Supremacy in laws, there must be Federal Supremacy in enforcement of laws and in the decisions of the courts. The quotation is noteworthy for three reasons. First, it illustrates a certain hypocrisy that has existed over the issue of States’ Rights. The South, which is thought of as the bastion of the principle of States Rights were outraged that a Federal law that favored their slavery position would be “nullified” by a Northern state. So they claimed and fought for Federal supremacy and preemption at that time. However, when the Federal Government later passed laws controlling slavery and reconstruction, the South claimed that States’ Rights should prevail. The Northerners, who were the losers in this case, then later turned around and used the precedent to prevent the South from nullifying anti slavery and civil rights legislation. So it also illustrates that court decisions that are favored or opposed in one situation can cut the other way with a different set of facts. While there are those that believe the law should be above political considerations, there are others who use this quotation and its aftermath to illustrate that much of law is just a question of “whose ox is gored.”
He made this quotation when he was a member of the Wisconsin State legislator. He was describing the influence and interaction that corporations had with the Wisconsin state legislative process.
