Southern Argus. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1834-1842, 1841-08-31

n OSiailty Ot construction
'nere seems to be some confusion nrI
tnonght. The two are so far from he
ing incompatible, as some seem 10 spn-
pose that, in many cases the existence
oil the one necessarily implies the ex-
istence OF the other. Thus where tho
powers Of the General government
and the State Government, DISCHARGE
the same functions, and consequently
are more or less in conflict. those
whose political principles incline them
10 construe the powers ofthe Federal
Government with strictness will. ON
that very account, construe the power
oil me State government with liberality
we see, for instance, that many of
the protested advocates for strict con-
struction, who deny to the General
Government the power to establish a
National Bank, under liberal con-
struction of the power TO coin money
and determine the value thereof. or
that ofregulating commerce, feel no
scruple in allowing the States 10 es-
tablish State banks, aud thus by these
institutions indirectly emit bills of
credit, which they are forbidden bv
the Constitution to do directly. Nor
have we seen many examples of a
more liberal construction than has
been given TO the clause which prohib-
It's States from passing laws that impair
the obligation of contracts, by men
calling themselves strict construction
lists. These terms, therefore, which
are so often used in an absolute sense
are altogether relative; and it will gem
orally be found that he who, in rela-
ton to the power distributed between
these two parts of our divided sove-
reignty, estimates the portion granted
TO one part with strictness, is sure to
estimate the part granted 10 the other
with liberality.
But some, who regard strictness OF
construction as an end-as something
good in itself, and not as means OF
| good-not able tc reconcile some oil
Mr.. Jeherson's official acts, such as
/ his ratification of the Louisiana pur.
chase, with such strictness of con.
struction, endeavOur to defend his pol
itcal purity, according to their cwn ar
bitrary standard, by the plea of neccs
: sity. They urged that, while h,
! would not allow himself, in any case
: to give free exposition Of the Consti
= tuition, Ihe might, in case Of extreme ur
: gency, disregard it altogether. L
] this it may be answered, that the ques
, ton of strict or liberal construction isc
a little moment,if the Constitution ma,
2 be violated on the'ground OF moral ne
# cessity, ofwhich the agent is to be tn
: Judge; that one of the main advan q
e tages of a written constitution, and {
c oaths to support it, is to exclude thi.
/ the tyrdnt's plea; that the alleged MT
l. cessity of the Louisiana purchas
o amounted only TO strong inducements
e about which the minds of men WEI
k then much divided; and that what NJ
,e Wilson Nicolas and others confessed
y ly did, without purposely vioIatin
their oaths, Mr.. Jefferson might |
le supposed to have done without viol;
/ ting his. And lastly, that ifthe nece
s. sity had been Of such palpable ar
< resistless character as 10 excuse Il
m overlapping all constitutional restrain
te in that case, the same plea could n
lg be urged in defence Of several 9th
is acts and opinions of Mr.. Jefferson.
e. could not defend him for asserting
f. the repeal of the Judiciary Law, e
to acted in the last moments of his pre-
al ecessor's term, by which Congre:
ty which was prohibited by the Constit
n ZION from IesseaiRg the salaries Of I
Ie, Judges, lest it should impair their
nd dependence, was allowed to take III
" away altogether. No such necessi
&C. could be alledged in favor ofthe Gu
berland Road, by which power o
asst erwise unconstitutional, he thong
he might be lawful exerted by Congre
,e- with the assent of three States. \
he would the plea avail to justify his pl
as suggested to Mr.. Eppes, of allow
IN, the General Government to carry
on the banking business in each Sti
rs whenever it could obtained the
in sent of such State, separately and
the dividually. ~,
ess These and other instances OF libt
rks construction, as well as the acqu
nee ton Of Louisiana, were justified by
ted Jefferson on precisely the same gro'
for as he justified other cases Of strict G
,ea- struction-giving to the ConstItii'
Dior ,hat Interpretation which, IN his e
/" / would best promote the public GO
ives and fulfil the purposes that instrum
II a He knew that both strictness and
OBJ erality of construction were equ
I oil deviations from the obvious and 0
ne nary acceptations Of language, ana
sive the same considerations which aut
ms. ICED one equally authorized the OF o.
eeral This rule of interpretation comic
cor ,oibe common sense and conn
; he practice of all mankind, excepttech
,on- Il LAWYERS; aud any other rule,
hich the impossibllity OF ioreseei ...s