The Arkansas advocate., 1830-08-18

,Se''s~o v lAC SOtctltutiOlis IOl prohibited by itt to the States, are re- served to the States respectively, or to the people,
 i ilis amendment having been approy- ed by three-iourths of the States. be- came part of the Constitution, and so continues. Now, one would suppose that human language could not express n more clear and explicit terms, the design of the different States in adopt ing this provision, which was manifest 1 ly to put away away all possibility of over strained constructions. And yet how tallacious were the anticipations of the Wise and cautious patriots who preced- cd us. The Constitution of the land is now altered every year, without the trouble of resorting to the forms of a regular amendment, and there is not single power, which 1t may be desira- ble fora majority of Congress to exer- ercise, for which, in the opinion of that majority, there cannot be found ample authority in the instrument itself. And what protection has the minority of States against these unlawful usurpa- tlons? None whatever. They are de- nied the right intended to be guaran- teed to them, ofhaving only such a Con 1 stitution as three-fourths of the whole number of States in the confederaey stall approve, ahieh $ elearly he olely sort of Constitatiom they hape e0er consent ed %. Not enjoying two-thirds of the representation in both Houses of Con gress, they can never propose amend ments. And not comprising two-thirds ofthe United States, they cannot im- pose on Congress the obligation of call ing q Convention.
 But Is there not virtue, IS there not justice, is there not respect enough for the spirit oi compromise which led to the formation of this Government, exist ing with the majority, to try the sense of the different States upon the points so confidently asserted by the minority to be violations of the Constitution? Is not such q course demanded by the spi,,- t, ifnot by the letter of the fundamental law, which alone establishes this con iederacy of sovereign and independent Republics? The provision which re- quires that no alteration of the Consti- tution shall be made, except by the sanction of three-fourths of the parties to the compact, most unequiyocally es- tablishes the principle, that in all doubt full ulconstructions, involving the dearest rights and liberties of the minority, ref erence should be had to the primitive source of power, for a solution of the doubt. But do we see manifested any disposition on the part of the major Iity in Congress to resort 10 this equi- table mode of interpreting the Consti- tuition? None whatever. That maiori- l ty knows too we'll that three-fourths of the States will not warrant the usnrpa- tions so unrighteously and unjusti6ably set up by them, through the means of forced constructions, and as they know that no alteration of the Constitution can be effected in a legitimate way, they are resolved to accomplish it by unlawful means; and by pursuing that course, it is wholly placed beyond the power of the minority to have the ques- ton brought before the competent tri- hunal.
 Many people we are aware, are under the impression, that the Supreme Court possesses, by the Constitution, ample power to decide all questions ot consti- tutional doubt. This can be shownto be an erroneous opinion, at least in regard to some of the important questions which are now at issue, and as we know that much blind prejudice existson this sub ject, we will state singleease, to prove what we assert. This singlecasc,is the oneof the tariff policy, in the enactment of which, the minority considers the Constitution 10 be most grossly violated. Now, let us inquire, how can the con stitutionaiity of this system ever be placed before the Supreme Court for it's adjudication? All the tariff laws pro
 fess Out some of them frauduleatly pro- Efess1 to be jaws for raising . revenue.
 But Congress, by the Constitution, pos sesses an unlimited power to enact laws
 for raising a revenue, and the Supreme 1 Court has no more authority 10 inter- . pose it's opinion as 10 the extent to which
 duties may be imposed under the plea
 ofraising revenue, than it has to control the legislation Of Congress as to the
 extent of the army or navy. lfan act
 l. << <,J <x., ,