Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1831-07-18

IN the business of the community Has the wisost
and most conscientious Judge ever scrupled to ac-
iuescc III decisions in which he has been overruled
Oy the matured opinions of the majority of his col
!eagues and subsequently, TO conform himself there
10, asfo authoritative expeditions of the law2 And
1t not reasonable that the same view of the OIL
ciai oath should be taken by legislator, acting
under the constitution, which is his pllide as is
TAKEN by Judge, acting under the law which is his2
There Is In fact and i'll common understanding, a
necessity of regarding course of practice, as
ABOVE characterized, in the light of legal rule of
interpreting law and there is n like necessity of
considering 1T Il constitutional rule of interpreting
| u constitution.
! That there may be extraordinary and peculiar
circumstances controlling the rule in both cases.
may be admitted; but with such exceptions the rule
viii force itself on the practical Judgment of tho
most ardent thcorist. He will find it impossible to
adhere to, and to act officially upon, his solitary
opinions as to the meaning of the law or consttu-
!on IN opposition to construction reduced prac-
ice, during reasonable period of time; moro espo-
cl9lIy where no prospect existed of a change of
construction by the public It's AGENTS And if a
reasonable period OF time, marked with the usual
sanctions, would not bar the individual prcrogatiye
there could be no limitation it's exercise althoi
the danger OF error must increase with the incpeas-
ing oblivion OF explanatory circumstances and
vain the continual changes in the import of words
and phrases TN
Let it then be left to the decision of every ,nto,
ugcnt ana candid Judge, which, on the whole ia
most to be relied for the true and safe const,rc
ton OF constitution, that which has the uniform
sanction of successive Legislative bodies throuol
period of years, and under the varied asccn,lonoS-
OF parties; or that which depends upon the opinions
OF every new legislature, heated as it NAV be by
spit OF party, eager in the pursuit of some
favorite object, or lea nat.av by the eoquence and
address of popular statesmen, themselves, perhaps,
under the influence Of the misleading causes.
1t i'll conformity with the view here taken,
of the respect due deliberate and reiterated pre-
cedents that the Bank of tho United States, though
the original question held to be unconstitutional
Sit Dt,rrp ir,tl tho,
The act originally establishing 4 Bank had under
gone ample discussions IN its passage through the
several branches of the government 1t had been
carried mt execution throughout period oftwcn
ty years with annual legislative recognitions; in ono
,:.-'ance inGeGI, with positive ramIfcation of it
into State and with the entire ac-"iesocnco
Of all the local authorities, well the nation
at large; to all of which NAV be added 4 decre,snr
adverse TO the constitutionaly of such an nstitu-
ton veto from the Executive under these cir
cumstanccs, with an admission of the expcdiency
ana almost necessity OF the measure, would have
been defiance of all the obligations derived from
a course OF prccedents amounting to tho requisite
evidence of the national judgment and intention
1t has been contended that the authority of pre-
cedents was IN that case invalidated by the con-
slderation that they proved only respect for the
stipulated duration of the Bank, with a toIera
ton Oft until the law should expire, and by the
casting vote given in the Senate by the Vice Pres
idcnt in the year 1911 against bill for establishing
a National Bank, the vote being expressly given
on the ground of unconstitutonaIitv But if the law
itself was unconstitutional the stipulation void,
and could not be constitutionay fulfilled or toler
atcd. And rs to the negative ofthe Senate by the
casting vote OF the presiding office, it is fact well
understood at the time that it resulted not from an
equality OF opinions in that assembly on the power
OF Congress TO establish Bank, but from junction
OF those who admitted tho power but disapproved
the plan, with those who denied the power. On
simple question of oonstitutionality there was de-
cided majority in favor of it.
JAMES MADISON.
Mr. INnrnsn1I