Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1855-11-08
COMPROMISING TIE CONSTITUTION.

COMPROMISING THE CONSTITUTION.
We ventured the other day to express the
wish that the policy of compromise had never
been introduced into American politics, at least
SO far as the Constitution is concerned. We
are satisfied, after sober, second thought"
that the proposition is entirely right and ten
able.
In the ordinary transactions of life, com
promise may not be proper, but even amiable.
individuals have the undoubted right to sub
NIT their private interests to the test of peace
ful arbtrament; they may surrender them al
together; and the peace of society is doubtless
promoted by the cultivation Of this conciliatory
and selt-sacri6cing spirit.
But in regard to the Constitution of the
never to have been admitted.
The inviolabilty Of the law is the supreme
interest Of the citizen, and the supreme safety
Of the people. So much is this the case that
even bad law should be rigidly enforced, SO
long as it remains on the statute book How
much truer and more important does the prin-
ciple become, when applied to the Constitu-
tion-the great fundamental law, the great
charter Of liberty, right and power?
First of all, no department of the Govern
ment no public functionary whatever, has any
right to compromise the Constitution. Every
public agent under it is required to take a
solemn oath to support its provisions, that is,
to carry them out in all their force, fully, en-
tirely, unreservedly. Compromise of any Of
its provisions is obviously an infraction Of the
obligations Of that oath, for compromise is not
a full execution but modification, some how
or other of those provisions.
Secondly. If the policy of compromise once
begins, where is it to end If the Constitution
is compromised in one particular, may it not
be in another, and yet another, until it becomes
the perfect wreck Of innovation?
Thirdly. Compromises, when once made are
often misunderstood, and, being misunderstood,
often violated. This leads to sectional apita-
ton and interna dssension, and finally i'm
perils the Union.
We are fully satisfied that this policy of
compromising the Constitution is bounty
upon sectional agitation-the very best
means of promoting sectional strife. So long
as the principle holds that the Consultation
may be compromised, sectional interests will
look to that principle for qualification and sup
port. The only sure preventive Of sectional
ism, the only certain guarantee for the general
harmony and the endurance Of our holy
Union is, it seems to US, TO be found in the
Constitution as it was made BY It's trainers, not
whitfield away by compromise or strained CON
struction, but the Constitution as It was and it
is, in all its purity and simplicity, and length
and breadth, as it came to us from the hands
of our fathers. Whatever compromises we're
proper, were made when the Constitution was
making; its trainers made compromises. while
engaged in arranging the terms Of the great
compact; but when they finished their great
work, compromises were at an end, and to in
troduce them now, to stand upon any other
platform than that Of the Constitution as it
was finished off by its founders. is to under.
mine the foundations Of the grand structure
which they reared, and 10 put in peril the sta
bility Of our glorious institutions.
Let US hear no more, then, Of the compro-
misses Of the Constitution. The Kansas and
Nebraska act has restored the true principles
of the Constitution, and there let us all stand.
And there, we believe, all the conservative
men Of the land will stand, and, resolving that
the great issue between the two great sections
Of the country shall be adjusted by the stand.
ard Of the Constitution, and it only, will put to
shame the restless spirits who are disturbing
the peace, and aiming at the destruction Of
the Union.