Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1832-10-03
&of1tteal.


!anyaage:
Each pubic officer who takes an oath 10 sup
oort the Constitution, snears that he t0iH support
= n, he understands IL, and not as Il is under
.,o9d by Others. Ii is as much the duty Of the
I,ou,e Of Representatives., Of the Senate. and Of
the President to decide upon the constitutionali-
90 ot sny bill or resolution which may be pre-
..nted to them for passage or approval, as it is
for the Supreme Judges when it NAV be brought
bsfure them for judicial decision. The opinion
ot me Judges has no more authority ouer Con-
5re,, than the opinion Of Congress has over the
illgss. and on that point the President is IN
J,usadeat Of both. The authority of the Su-
r.rme Court must not. therefore. be permitted to
routrol the Congress or the Executive, when act
mo in their legislative capacities. but to have on
Is such inference as the force Of their reasoning
nay deserve.
lanes MADISON, one Of the founders Of the
Constitution, and one Of its abiest expositors in
,5e numbers of the Federalist, thus writes in re-
ference to " the authoritative force" of preced.
,o,. to The decisions Of the Supreme Court, and
20 the seu.e in which the oath to support the Con-
,,itqt,on must be interpreted. He will hardly
be deemed less cosnizant, we apprehend, Of the
true intent and ,Seaning Of the Constitution, than
Andrew Jackson.
The case in question has its true analogy IN
ne obligation arising from Judicial expositons Of
ne Jaw on succeeding judges; the constitution
being law to the legislator, as the law is rule
Of decision to the judge.
And why are judicial precedents, when form
Ell on due discussion and consideration, and de-
hberateIy sanctioned bv reviews and repetitiOns,
regarded as Of binding Influence, or rather of
authoritative force, IN settling the meaning Ut
iaw; Ii must be answered, LIST, because ii Is
reasonable and established axiom, that the good
of suciety requires that the rules of conduct of
It's members should be certain ard known, which.
would DOT be the case il any judge, disregarding
the decisions Of his predecessors should vary the
rule Of law according TO his individual iuterpre.
tarion Of 1t. Misera est servitus ubi JUS est aut
yasum aut incosnitum. (Wretche6 is the slave
~ where the iaw IS either uncertain or unknown
2d, because an exposition Of the law publicly
made aud repeatedly confirmed by the constituted
authority, carries with, by fair Inference, the
sanction Of those sho. having made the law
through the legislative organ. appear under such
! circumstances, 10 have determined its meaning
4 through their judiciary organ
"Can 1t be Of less consequence that the mean.
ing Of the Constitution should be fixed and known.
than that the meaning of law should be SOP
Can indeed law be fixed in its meaning and its
i operation, unless the Constitution be 81? On the
es~ss~-v, S p~..,, ~isr fegstaTUrS, uifIerr,ry in
the construction Of DEMONSTRATION, roma series of
preceding constructions, proceed to at OF that
! difference, they not oniy Introduce uncertaiaty
and nstabitiy IN The Constitution. 6u an the ia,rs
tten'sefces; Inasmuch as all laws, preceding the
new CONSTRUCTION, aud inconsistent with il, are
not only annuled tor the future, but virtually pro.
nOunced utilities frcm tie beginning.
=. But IL is said that the legislator HARM q
sacora 10 support The constitution, must support
his o,on constr action of IL. ho,cerer different from.
+ that pat on II by his predecessors. or tohGterer
he the consequence Of TIE construction. And is
not the Judge under the same oath to support the
4 law? yet has it ever been supposed that he was
required, or at liberty 10 disregard all precedents
however solemny repeated and regularly obser-
we'd: and bv giving effect to his own abstract
ahd ud,rioIai opinions, TO disturb the establish
cd course 1T practice IN the business of the COM
muHlty: tics he rtsest and most conscie,.f ions
j"tse erer scrYfd 20 acqeaescs in decisions in
,rbich he has been orsrruiei 6y lie mniured Oui,
ions Of the mJoray II has collie g0es; aud sub
sequently to conform hlmSelf thereto, as to, au-
hOntative expusitions If the laws And is il
not reasonable that the same view Of the official
oath should be taken by legislator. actin. un-
der the constitution, which is his guide, "a is
taken by ajudge. acting under the law, which is
hlsi
q" There is IN TACT and in common understau
dug, necessity Of regarding course Of prac.
uee' as above characterized, in the light OF legal
rule OF interpreting law; and there Is a like ne
eesSity Of considering it constitutional rule of
interpreting constitution.
That there may be extraordinary and pecu-
''ar circumstances controlling the rule in both cas-
6, may be admitted; but with such exceptions.
We rule will force itself upon the practical iuds-
~eA' OF The most ardent theorist. He will hml
Impossible to adhere to. aud act officially up-
o. as SOLITARY opinions as to the meaning Of the
a" or Constitution. in opposition TO con-
'uuvuon, reduced to practice, during a rca.
''naoie period of time; more especially where
OpfOsPenl existed OF a change Of construction
:. Tue public OF It's agents And if a reasonable
per'od OF time, marked with the usual sanctinns.
"V.'o not bar the individual prero.aiiye, there
Ou'c Dc no limitation to Its exercise, although
ae danger of error must Increase with the N.
Neasns oblivion oi explanatory c,r,umst,rcrs