Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1847-07-21


misapprehenIs AMI msrepresents the meaning Of
the exceptions we took to portion Of the 9Th Re
solution of the Ilarbor and River Convention. We
did not say that common unders Standing or com
mon sense had nothing 10 do in the solution Of
Constitutional questions but that it was an impro-
per and unsafe position to assume that common
understanding merely should be considered as much
part of the Constitution as any Of its most cx.
pl.cit provisions We Ie.crreI to cases in which
common under. tanIng once sanctioned as con
shtutional what now is generally admitted to be
mconstuional--and we might re'cr 10 other ca
ses in which common understanding as regards
constitutional principles is now undergoing
change. The time will come, we believe, when a
protective or revenue tariff VIII be, as a bank and
an indiscriminate system of internal Improvements
have been, repud.atcl as unconstitutional, and the
policy of direct ana equal taxation be decided upon
as the only truly republican and consstio ioi mode
of raising public revenue. Had The common
understanding on the subject Of a Bank been con-
sidered as much a part of the Constitution as any
OF its most explicit provisions, amendment q
''i"l ms l"'i'''' ""''' nav IN 'ooN8S ~ "''-
thorize the establishment Of the subreasury in
place OF a Bank as the fiscal agent OF the govern
meht II Is unfortunate mat The leading advocates
OF National Bank could not h''e had the Leneht
Of the idea now advanced IN reeFeace to the force
of common UNDERSTANDING The discovery made
by the Chicago Convention or, rather by John {.
'l'"''' "''' i'o' '','' ''ie I''S u s"'' HIS" d.
",'S'.' "''' nay
''''--'''' '''''''''i ''l's' 'li''','7 Oh 81,
- - ''''' = N''''' ""'lSH 10 " u elo"l
VIA ''' l'S' 'N i''''' ''is'o"S % ''o No''-
s'''u'l'' We 0o i'o' S'' ~" '''e "',' - 10 " Is
'"''s'ie' eN''i' through ''i '7'lI'e"I o. 'Hd' lii
S"''i''"''
"'''' may 'o' '''' '''1e Ol
i'S COVER" Tue i"coon {" ''' instrument; put
-, ''''.'
-
...-u-,
we admit mat decisions OF lie proper judicial
Tribunals upon doubtful constitutional po.h,' nave
the weight and force OF explicit laW-and this
whether IN accordance with common understand
ING or opposed to It, or whether IN accordance
with common sense or opposed to 1t, as they not
unircquen'Iy are. Mere precedentS OF public op,n-
ION or legislative prcceentS are however very diff
! lerent affairs We haze but little reverence Tor
them and II would be letter Tor the country were
they oliener d'sregarded than regarded.
1t may suit those who have been brought up in
that way to receive without question the construc-
tons mt nnon divine ami human law b,, those who
have been or are hiub in authority in Church and
State and to be startled at the lie ast deyiaons from
the line marked out by their fathers, as inhdc or
treasonable but we choose not to have our mind
in chains; and while we should be disposed to re-
spect the opinions of men Of intellect OF preceding
times, should not be willing to take those opin-
ions and he governed BY them, without having first
convinced ourself as to their soundness and truth
Something more than the recommendation Of
great name is required by intelligent and independent
minds before receiving. as truth the constructions
or opinions, upon any subject, of any man or class
of men, ancient or modern. And whatever may be