Southern sentinel. [volume] (Plaquemine, Parish of Iberville [La.]) 1848-1858, 1851-08-23

No. II VALERY LANDRY UPON THE ACT O.
LEGISLATURE TO PROVIDE FOR THE TRIAL o.
CASES IN WHICH THE JUDGE OF THE DlsTRlc.
COURT WHERE THE SAME ARE DEPENDING MAJ
| BE REFUSED"
The enormity of such proposition puts
beyond the pale of civil discussion.
9th. 1t has always been held that the pre-
sumption must always be in favor of the vail
dity of law, and that no law ought to be helc
unconstitutional and consequently void, of nc
effect unless its opposition to the constitution
to clear and free from doubt
Decree.
| Presumption in favor of validity of laws
wheree Validity Of which law! The consti
tuition is law too, or may be more than law, al
| least the highest law, law to legislation, which
it would not be if validity OF laws prevail q
against the constitution "Presumption in ia.
vor of the validity laws" of this so it means
more than it says. "Marry this is michine
mallecho; its means mischief" 1t means
presumption against the constitution The
constitution and the law, the only thing con.
fronted. The presumption in favor ofthe law
is against the constitution or against wind.
mill
In spite of the tantology.
"1t has always been held that the presump.
ton must always be-" &c.
There are honorable exceptions, indeed, the
very authority of the rule degrades it.
First impression that this rather cavalier
way, of treating things of this import, that it
had always been held ''withou, saying when,
where, by whom.
But the apology is incidental may be, and
and thought better to cite no authority than bad
authority. In that system, cited twice in the
decree" The elementary principles of english
law in that ample repository of Faulty and
atrocty.
1t is a judicial dogma. That the law of par
Lament is above us, whenever they are called
on to surrender the constitution to the Legis-
lature, and with equal pliancy.
For treason is ever versatile they never: be-
tray parliament to the prerogative.
But persist there are honorable exceptions
at least two in twelve. The history of En-
glish jurisprudence, taken at randoa of the
twelve judges, there were but ten miscreants
who under the combined influence of terror and
corruption (the only mitigations of their ire
missible sin were first pipe clayed in the Star
Chamber, and then cooked up on the bench, to
decree the levy Of ship money and port duties,
constitutional reverence to the shades of
Crook and Hatten
The argument. mine, there was no other, of
repugnance to the constitution was supported
exclusively by implication
Decree.
"Answer filed by the district Judge, in which
reason for refusing to try the suits are given at
length.
cart. 96 has also been relied on"
Eoden.
Art: 75,-6,-7,-8,-ll5.
Passim.
Confessed then, exclusive of implication.
10. Reason. 20. art. rs 80. art-ll5, art.
75-6-7-8, also confessed they are remitted
for not true in the answer, suppressed in the
decree, not reclaimed for there is enough con.
fessed without them. Should it be rejoined
that "The reasons might be of implication.
Surely the citations of art. 95 lis could notb be
so traverstied, than it was at least needless, to
say my argument exclusively of implication
that is no controversy of the argument impli-
cation, is interference, not expressed but tacitly
true it must have premise text
some thing expressed, some organ to reverbe.
rate. The decree furnishes the illustration
by citing a text. "That the functions of the
supreme and district courts shall be judicial"
from hence inferred, not expressed but tacitly
that the Judge of the 9Th. should
do the judicial in the 4th.
1t has been no answer to say that that was
exclusively by implication was not justly de-
rived or that it was disappointed by other texts
as shown.
The subject matter, has had my most Sc
rious consideration, mean the act to recused
cases, not the decree, it has been received only
as an accident
Impressed that the act was an usurpation
upon the constitution. The subject was
brought by correspondence before two success
sive Governors, with the suggestion that the
doubtful act, should be by message recon-
nended for repeal. When disappointed the
subject was recurreG to in the column of a
laily paper, published at and during the ses-
sion of the Legislature, both the acts, that to
'ecused cases, that to interchange were inqui-
ed, for they are the same in any constitutions
Il aspect, nothing is known, of the impression
~ made the essays.
But the fact is notorious, that that session
proposed the amendment to enable the Le- |
,islature to direct the district judges to in
erchange.
One of the members of the supreme court
vas member of that Legislature and is be-
ieved to have occurred to the proposed amend
nent. He was promoted to the Bench and
'oncurred with the others to issue the Rule,
which was responded to by labored tho hur-
led answer, comprising the previous views
AIKEN in the correspondence and in tie essays |
The Decree has removed none on the contrary, |
las corroborated all the first impressions. in
inc, that the law could not be constitutional
which almost full Bench could not make
wen plausible.
Thus, my convictions, are absolute; but on a
subject Of common order the convictions even
If subordinate judiciary must yield to decisions
the plural is precised) in the last resort
lo This is not a subject Of common order;
90 There are not decisions in the last resort