The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1831-1858, 1832-10-10

There is not SIR the slightest reason to think tina
| any Senate, or any House of Representatives eve
assembled under the constitution, contained
majority that doubted the constitutional existence
! OF the power OF Congress to establish bank
! whenever the question has arisen, and has beef
/ decided, II has been always decided one way. Ih
legislative precedcH:s all assert and maintain tn,
/ power, and these legislative precedents have beer
the law ol the land for almost forty years. IheI
/ settle the construction of the constitution, anC
sanction the exercise of the power in question 81
lar as these nds can ever be accomplished by any
legislative presidents whatever. But the Pres
Gent does not admit the authority Of precedent
| Sr, have always found that those who habtual.
~ deny most vehemenily the general force of pre-
ceueht, and assert most strongly the supremacy O
private opinion. yet, Of all men. most tenacious
OF that very authority of precedent whenever il
happens to be in their favor ! beg leave to ask
SIR upon what ground except that of precedent and
precedent alone the Presidents friends have plac-
ca ms power of removal from Office No such
power Is given by the constitution, in terms, nor
any where intmated throughout the whole of it ;
no paragraph or clause oil that instrument recognl-
yes such power. To say the least, it is as ques-
tlonable, and has been often questioned, as the
power OF Congress to create bank and enlight.
ened by what has passed under our own observa-
ton, we now see, that it is Of all powers the most
capable of fragrant abuse. Now, sir, ask again
what becomes ut this power, if the authority of the
precedent be taken away 1t has all along been
denied to exist, it is where found in the consti
tuition, and its recent exercise, to call things by
their right names, its recent abuse, has than
any other single cause rendered good men either
cool In their affections towards the government or
DOUBTFUL of its long continuance. Yet this power
has precedent, and the President exercises it. We
KNOW sur that without the aid of that precedent,
MS acts could never have received the sanction of
this body. even at time when his voice was some
what more potential here, than it now is, or as |
trust, ever again will be. Does the President then
reject the authority of all precedent except what
is suitable to his purposes to use and does he
use without stint, or measure all precedents which
may augment his own power, CRAFTY his wishes?
But II the President thinks lightly Of the uthori-
" OF Congress in constituting the Constitution he
thinks still more lightly of the authority of the Su-
preme Court. He asserts right of individual
!uugmcht on Constitutional questions, which is to-
any inconsistent with any proper administration of
,ne government, or any regular execution Of the
laws. social disorder, entire uncertainty in regard
10 individual rights and individual duties the ces.
sat"'n OF legal authority, confusion the dissolution
OF Tree government all these are the inevitable
consequences of the principles adopted by the mes
sage whenever they shall be carried TO their full
extent Hitherto it has been thought that the final
decision OF constitutional questions belonged to
the supreme judicial tribunal. The very nature of
Tree government, it has been supposed, enioins
this; and our constitution, moreover has been un-
derstood so to provide clearly and expressly II is
true that each branch of the legislature has an I'M
doubted right in the exercise of its functions to
consider the constltutiOnaty of law proposed to
be passed. This is naturally part of its duty and
neither branch can be compelled 10 pass any law or
to do any other act which il deems TO be beyond the
reach OF its constitutional power. The President
has the same right when bill is presented for his
approval for he is doubtless, bound TO consider in
all cases whether such bill be compatible with the
constitution, and whether he can approve it con-
slsently with his oath of Office. But when law
h ham ms kt l.. Al
President, it is no longer in the power, either Of
the same President, or his SUCCESSORS say wheth-
er the law is constitutional or not. He is not at
liberty to disregard it he is not at liberty to feel
or to affect constitutional scruples" and to sit in
Judgment himself, on the validity of statute of
the government, and to nullify it il he so chooses
After law has passed through all the requisite
ae f5 It hhd @ thg egsa s
question OF its constitutionaity then becomes iu-
dicial question, and judicial question a lone In the
Courts, that question may be raised, argued and
adjudged; it can be adudged no where else
The President is as much bound by the law
as any private citizen, and can no more contes,
its validity than any private citizen. He NAV
refuse to obey the law, and so may private cit.
lien but both do it at their own peril, and nei.
ther ofthem can settle the question of its valid.
ty. The President may say law is unconstitu-
tlonal. but he is not the Judge. Who is TO decide
that question? The Judiciary, alone, possess this
unqueslionable, and hitherto unquestioned right
The Judiciary is the constitutional tribunal of
appeal for the citizens, against both Congress
and the Executive, in regard to the constitution
atty of laws. 1t has this jurisdiction expressly
conferred upon il, and when it has decided the
question, its judgment must, from the very
nature OF all judgments that are final, and from
which there Is no appeal, be conclusive. Hith.
erto, this opinion, and a correspondent practice
I,af Ill.
consderate men, If it were otherwise, there
would be no government Of laws; but we
should all live under the government, the rule,
the caprces OF individuals If we depart from
the observance of these sautary principles. the
executive power becomes at once purely des-
potic; for the President, if the principle and
the reasoning OF the message be sound may eth
er execute, or not execute, The laws OF The land
according to his sovereign pleasure He NAV
refuse to put into execution one law, pronounc-
ed valid by all branches of the government and
yet execute another, which may have been hv
constitutional authority, pronounced void On
the argument OF the message, The President of
the United States holds, under new prc,ence
and a new name, a dispensing poaoer over the
laws, as absolute as was claimed BY James the
Second Of England, month before he was
compelled to fly the kingdom. That which is
now claimed for the President, is, in truth,
nothing less, and nothing else, than the old
dispensing pO'osr asserted by the Kings OF
Englaad in the worst of timcs-the very eli.
max, indeed of all the preposterous prelensions
of the Tudor and the Stuart races
According to the doctrines put forth by the
President, although Congress may have passed
n Law, and although the Supreme Court NAV
have pronounced it constitutional, vet il is, rev.
ertheess, no law at all, if he, in hls good pleas
ure, sea fit 10 deny its effect; in other words to
repeal and aunul it. Sir, no President, and no
public man, ever before advanced such doctrines
in the face of the nation. There never before
was a moment in which any President would
have been tolerated in asserting such claim Ia
despotic power. After Congress has passed the
law, and after the Supreme Court has pronounc-
ed its Judgment Tn the very point in cOntroyer
sy, the President has set up his own private
judgment against its constitutional interpreta-
ton. 1t is to be remembered. Sir, that it is the
present law, il is the act of 1916 il is the pres.
ont charter of the Bank, which the President
pronounces to he unconstitutional 1t is no
Bank to be created, it is no law proposed 10 be
passed, which he denounces it is the law now
existing, passed by Congress, approved by
President Madison, and sanctioned by solemn
Judgment of the Supreme Court, which he now
declares unconstitutional and, which of course
So far ms it may depend on him, cannot be
executed. If these opinions Of the President
be maintained there Is an end nj all law and al
judicial authority. Statutes are but recnmmen
datlons, judgments no more thqn opinions
! Both are equally destitute of binding force
| Such an universal power, as is now claimed TO
him, power of judging over tue laws, am
over the decisions of tho tribunal, is nothin!
elso Than pure despotism Ii conceded TO him