Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-05-14

This was written under date of February LIST,
1919. On February 18th, 1851, we find him thus
expressing himself in the Senate of the United
States:
~ happen TO be at least of the members Of thu:
hoav-how many more there are / do not know--y31c
never introduce this agtatng subject Of slavery here who
have been content with the debates which bad
IL when il came egmately before us in the fern Of bill:
recurring debate bills which, in the process of legsla
non became or might become laws | one who has
on the subject in this House since the bill:
referred l. 1.-THE compromise measures became laws and
of whom il be said that have any OCCASION by
speech writing, otherwise, addressed the people on
the subject since those bills became laws Sir, claim
then to be one Of those who have been to leave
these measures the scrutiny of the people, and abide
thes, Judgment and the test of time and truth
To Gov Seward belongs the authorship of an
Glitter aicum which has become very shibboleth
Of party-we mean that much abused phrase, the
Higher Law" The context in which it lies en-
bedded runs as follows: I'VE lnal no arbitrary au.
thority over any thing, whether acquired lawfully
or seized 10y usurpation. The Constitution regu-
ates our stewardship; the Constitution devotes the
domain to union to justice, to defence, to welfare,
and to liberty But there is higher law than
the Constitution, which regulates our authority
over the domain and devotes it to the same noble
purposes" We confess this sentence seems to us
harmless enough, and it may be wondered that such
pother has been raised over it. If there be trea-
son in it, the discoveries must be admitted TO have
made the most Of it. SO far from asserting any
contrariety between this higher law" and the
constitution, Gov. Seward expressly declares that
in his Judgment, they both converge to the same
point, "the same noble purposes" We believe in
/" the higher law but are far from being that
n-a dnac Cow Sayua rd inst we he
eve in the Constitution without feeling ourselves
constrained to draw from it all of his differences.
The cath administered in every court IF law and
justice is to us much more notable recognition OF
g the higher law " than any speech of Mr. Stewards.
Frsm one sentiment of Mr.. Seward we must
wholly and decidedly dissent. He declares that the
Declaration of Independence is Of authority to
I" expound what may seem obscure in the Constltu-
ton )" and because it asserts that all men are born
free and equal, and have inalenable rights to the
enjoyment of life liberty, and the pursuit of hap
piness, he nfers the mpossibility of any thing like
"a proprietary right in persons held to service ac-
cording to the terms of the Constitution. An able
author and divine has intmated the suppositon,
with Gov. Seward, that "any man swearing to the
Constitution swears also to the Declaration of indie
pendence, as underlying and sustaining the former
instrument" We do not thus understand the re-
,lations between these two charters of American Ii
berty. That vague generalites should thus be
pressed into the service of multiplying later and
specific enactment we cannot but regard as in the
highest degree sophistical and dangerous. Did il
strike those who entertain such idea that il
may be argued with much greater justice and plausi
bility that the English Constitution "underies and
sustaips" our own Whence come many of our
constitutional terms, and the very phraseology
Of its enactments? Where do we find the sgnif-
Of " bills of attainder" er-post facto laws,
the "ha6eas corpus" &c. in the English Consti-
tuition Does our Constitution contain any refer
ences to the Declaration of Independence so papa-
Bile and distinct these to that of Great Britain
And does, then, he who swears to the American
swear also to the English Constitution A parity
of reasoning certainly leads to such conclusion.
So far as there may be any alteration, therefore,
between these two munments and title-deeds Of the
Republic, it clearly becomes the duty of legsla-
tors to yield their undivided allegiance that which
they directly and unreservedly to observe and
maintain, without seeking to abate any of its dis
tincve enactments by CLOSES eued from the earlier
document. Still less is it justifable to explain
away the obvious import of clause N the Consti-
tuition by rebutting it with what at best nothing
more than few fne-sounding republican fctions,
which assert much more than they mean. If the
Declaration of Independence is the testamentary
viii by which our fathers have beqaeathed to Us
the rich inheritance Of civil liberty the Constitution
is the codcil which parcels out our shares If the
Declaration constituted the swathings of the infant
Hercules of our Freedom it is not seemly to piece
out the manly toga furnished by the Constitution
with shreds and patches cut from such infantile
bandages The rent is made worse