Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1851-05-24

upon all parties to carry out the spirit OF every
compact, so that its objects may be best fulhlieo.
think, then, that the assumption OF each State 70
place its own Interpretation upon that instrument
would defeat the very object of its creation good
General Government. The acts of Government
are laws II is essential to all good laws that they
should have a uniform constructon-that there
should be some tribunal to enforce and expound
them The separate Interpretation of each State
would necessarily lead to confusion and misrnle'
since the meaning of each law would vary accord
ing to the habits interests and political preJudices
Of each community. We are told, in the preamble
of that instrument, that its object was to form
more perfect union, establish justice and promote
the general welfare Could that object ever be OBJ
tanned by each party placing its own arbitrary con-
srucon uon 10 clauscs, and refusing at discretion
TO be bound by the general laws? And can we De
so simple as to suppose that the States, in every
case of separate interpretation, would setting ASIDE
their own interests, conform entirely to the spirit
OF Justice, and consult the general welfare Alas
we know too much of sectional jealousy, of State
pride, of the motives of seinterest, to lead US to
nut much confidence in their uniform sense Of right
In their preenson to guard and protect the interests
Of their citizens from injury by the Central power,
they would too often impair by actssof notification
that general paramount interest which we all pos
sess in a common Government. Unfortunately
examples are not wanting to show that they are
quite as willing as individuals to shake off the
weight Of obligations, when conflicting with their
supposed advantage We are bound, then, to look
first at the instrument, and construe it with no dis
position to refinement, but according to Its plain
and obvious meaning. What signifies that section
which says " the Judicial power shall extend to
all cases in law and equity arising under this
L Constitution" Simply that the Supreme Court,
combining within itself the characteristics both OF a
court of law and equity, can afford an ample rene
DIV against an unconstitutional law. For instance
suppose State should pass law impairing the
obligation of contracts, the party aggrieved would
find its remedy in Federal Court, which has full
power to declare the State law null and void
Again, it shall extend "to controversies of which
the United States shall be party" How unjust
since i'll that case it becomes Judge in Its own
cause Again, that clause which says :" this
|. Constitution, and the laws of the United States
made in pursuance thereof, &c. shall be the SUI
preme law, and the judges in every State shall be
bound thereby, any thing in the constitution o.
laws Of any State to the contrary notwithstand
: ing Does it not suppose power lodged some
where to interpret and declare the supreme law
since it presupposes the infraction of the supreme
law by the Constitution or Legislature of State
Let us see what sense it would have made, if i
had been composed in this wise g The Constitu.
Z ton, and the laws Or the United States made II
Il pnrsnance iheraOf shah be the supreme law, ant
f the judgtSfn every State shall be bound thereby
any thing in the constitution or laws OF any Sta
to the contrary notwithstanding; but each Stat'
may place its own construction upon it, and ther
the judges of every State shall be bound by tina
construction" which, in my judgment, amount:
to this, that State has only to consult its owr
inclination whether or no it will render obedience
to the general law.
| Now, in turning away from the text of the Con
stituton, let us see what say those who took pro
minent share in its formation. The Federast, We
all know, was written for the express purpose o
recommending the Constitution to the people of the
States. Turn to No. &c. which was written by
Mr.. MADISON, and in which he most admirably
sketches out the leading features of the Govern
ment and mark the conclusion, which shall quote
Speaking of the extent of the powers of the Genera
Government, he says: In this relation, then, the
proposed Government cannot be deemed ma
tiona one, since its jurisdiction extends to certain
enumerated objects only, and leaves to the seve
raj States residuary and inviolable sovereignty
over all other objects It true, in controversies
relating to the boundary between the two juris.
dictions, the tribunal which is ultimately to decide
is to be established under the General Govern.
ment. But this does not change the principle o
the case; the decision is to be impartially made,
according to the rules of the Constitution, and al
the usual and most effectual precautions are taker
to secure this impartiality. Some such tribunal
is clearly necessary to prevent an appeal to the
sword and dissolution of the compact and thai
it ought to be established under the General ra.
ther than under the Local Governments, or, to
speak more properly, that it could be safely estab
lished under the first alone, is position not likely
to be combated." Compare this with Mr.. Ma.
dison's opinion in letter written by him in 1890
]" The Constitution is compact: its text is to be
expounded according to the provisions for ex.
pounding it-making part of the compact, and
none of the parties can righuully renounce the ex
/ pounding provision more than any other part"
LUTHER MARTIN, in his genuine information to
the Legislature Of Maryland, says: By the third
article the judicial power of the United States is
vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior
courts as the Congress may from time to time or
dain and establish. These courts, and these only,
will have right to decide upon the laws of the
United States, and all questions arising upon their
construction, and in judicial manner to carry
these laws into execution; to which the courts,
both superior and Inferior of the respective States,
and their judges and other magistrates, are rem
dered incompetent. Whether, therefore, any laws
or regulations Of the Congress, any act Of its
i President or other officers, contrary to or not
warranted by the Constitution, rests only with the
! judges who are appointed by Congress to deter
! mine by whose determination every State must
\ be bound" Such is the construction of that ar
ticle by one who was bitter enemy to the pro-
posed Constitution.