The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1843-08-22
From The Augusta Sentinel.
United States Banls-Mr. Ma.
disOn's Letter.

when we invite the attention OF the reader
as worthy Of his careful consideration
MONTPELIER. June %, 1881.
4 Dear Sir have received your friendly
letter Of the 18th inst. The few lines
which answered your former one Of the 2lst
OF January last, we're written IN haste and
IN bad health but they expressed though
without The attention IN some respects due
to the occasion, q dissent from tho views
OF the President, as to Bank of the Uni
ted States aud a substitute for IL. TO which
cannot but adhere. The objections to
the Latter have appeared TO predominant
greatly over the advantage expected from
II, and the consIilutionality Of the former
still regard as sustained by the considera.
. ton TO which yielded IN giving ny assent
to the existing baIk.
The charge Of inconsistency between my
objection TO the cons,ituiionallty Of such
1ank IN 1871, aud my assent IN 1877, turns
/ on the question, how far legislative prece-
dents, exPounding the Constitution, ought
to guide succeeding legislatures, ah4 to
override individual opinions.
Some obscuri,y has been thrown over the
question, by confoundlng II with the respect
cue from enc legislature to laws passed BY
7 preceding legislatures. But The two cases
are essentially different. A Constitution
being derived from a superior authority, IS
10 be expounded and obeye not controlled
or varied by The subordinate authority Of
legislature. A Law on the other hand, rest.
ing on no higher authority than that pos
sessed by every successive ies's}.'ulc' Us
expedleucy as well as its meaning 10 within
the scope Of the latter.
The case 10 question has lis rue esa.oSy
IN the obligation arising from, s-S's va eA'
positions Of the law on e--~seu'ng Juogesi
The constitution he-.g a law TO the leglsla
tor ne The - Is a rule Of decision TO The
iludpe,
formed on due discussion and consideration,
aud deliberately sanctioned By reviews and
repetliions, regarded as oil binding influence
or rather of authoritative force in settling
the meaning Of q law Ii must be answer.
ed, LIST, because it is a reasonable and es
tablishcd axiom, that the good Of society
requires that the rules Of conduc, Of It's
members should be certain and known,
which would not be the case # any Judge,
dissegarding the decisions of his predeces-
sors, Should vary the rule Of law according
to his individual Interpretation OF it
Niserc est ssrri:ia, ubi Jus est aut ragum
dut rncogniium. ID, because al exposition
Of the law, publicly made and repeatedly
confirmed BY the constituted authority, car.
ries with it, BY fair inference the sanction
Of those who having made the law through
their legislative organ, appear under such
circumstances 10 have determined its mean.
ing through their judiciary organ.
Can II 10 Of less consequence that The
meaning Of 0 constitution should be- fixed
and known, than that the meaning Of a
law should be so Can, indeed, law be
fixed IN lis meaning and operation, unless
the constitution be Sc Ga the con,rary,
# particular legislature, differing 10 the
construction Of the constitution, from q Sc.
RES of procedure rnnsfrr~f,o-- $1,000 ~
ael on t1ai G!iierDce, they not only intro
duce uncertainty and insia biIily IN the con.
sii'ution, but in the laws themselves, mas I
much as al avs preceding tie new con.
struction, and inconsistent with IL, are not
only annulrd for the future, but virtually
pronounced utilities from the beginning.
But II IS said that the legislator swofr 10
supper, the constitution, must support II m
his own construction Of it, however differ
eni from that pu, on II By his predecessors.
OF whatever be The consequences Of the
construction And is not the Judge under
The same oath TO support the law Yet,
has q ever been supposed that he was re
CURED, OF a, liberty to disregard al prece. 1
dents, however solemnly repeated and repu
larly observed and BY eiving eiIec, 10 his
own abstract and individual opinions, 10
disturb The established course Of practice
IN the business Of the community Has
the wisest aud nest conscientious Judge ey.
er scFuplcd TO acqulesce IN decisions IN
Which be has been overruled by the ma,ur.
ed opinions ofthe majority Of MS colleagues I!
ana subsequently, 10 conform himself there 4,
70 as 10 an authoritative exposition OF the
a~ And IS !, not reasonable 10 suppose
that The same view Of the official oath should
&c taken BY legislator, acting under the
which IS his guide, a. Is taken
BY Judge, acting under the law, Which /
s his In
There IS 10 fact and ic common under. :
'iandine, necessity Of regarding a course |
! practice, as above characterized, in The
isht Of legal rule of interpreting law, aud /
here IS a like necessity Of considering il a /
constitutional rule Of interpreting a con \
tIiuilon. :
That there may be extraordinary nd ne. s
.ullar circumstances controlling the rule m 8
10Th cases, may be admitted bot with such @
EXCEPTIONS the rule will force itself on the r
'raciIcal judgment Of the most ardent ,heo. 4
isi. lle will iind It impossible 10 adhere h
0, and act officially upon his solitary opln. 81
ons IS TO the meaning Of the Law or cons;i. 4
liion, 10 opposition TO construction TO- n
uced TO practice, during a reasonable pc. n
nd OF tune; more especially where 40 n
respect existed Of change Of construction