Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1856-07-15
THE CoNsTITUTION THE SUPREME
LAW.


The Constitution, and the laws which shall
be made IN pursuance thereof shall
be the supreme laao Of the land"
Such is the language of the Constitution,
which was ordained and established, in order
to form a more perfect union between the
members of the Confederation of the thirteen
old States Of America
1t ordains supremacy in the Constitution
over all law, and subordinates law to its au-
thority. 1t gives supremacy to laws, which
"pursue" the Constitution, but to none other !;
the Constitution, it annuls, as acts of usurpa
tion all laws which are not made in pursuance
of the Constitution.
We maintain the Constitution as the supreme
law of the land, above all legislation. That
which it sanctions, is sacred; that which it
does not warrant is legislative larlessness.
1t is in our view the peculiar mission of the
Democratic party to assert and to maintain
the supremacy of the Constitution over all leg.
islation. The history of its action upon the
slavery question for twenty years has been the
record Of its struggle against foes without and
weak friends within its fold, to stand upon one
platform, not the shifting sands Of legislative
enactments, but the solid rock basis Of the
Constitution. Others may affirm the sacred.
ness Of so-caled compromises, which trench
upon the rights secured by the Constitution
others may bewail the repeal of the Missouri
restriction north Of 360 30>; others may chime
in with our enemies, and, denouncing its swan
tonness and recklessness," imagine its origin
in the personal ambition of its gallant and
distinguished author; but the Democracy,
without fear or compromise, condemns all
/" compromises" not warranted by the Const.
tuition, AZ I" no law" and announces the resto-
ration of its sacred compromises as the only
hope of a union of peace and order, and law.
Can it be believed nop-would it be believed
by Jefferson and Madison, were they restored
to life-that the howl of rage and grief which
ascends from the dens Of Black Republicanism,
and is more family echoed in the deprecations
of the Everetts and Fillmores of the North, is
occasioned by simple repeal of law pro.
scriptive Of the South, and the enactment in
its place Of the law of the Constitution? Is it
scarcely credible that any man OF common in.
telligence and common honesty would oppose,
with embittered hate, the restoration of that
sectional equality, under the agis of the Con.
stitution, which had been destroyed by mere
act Of Congress7
And yet the whole canvass is staked upon
the wanton and reckless" repeal of the Mis-.
sour Compromise, and the enactment Of the
just and equal law Of 1854.
Was the Missouri Compromise just? Had not
the South paid her proportion Of the purchase
money for Louisiana? If she bore her share
Of the burden, is it just to exclude her from
her share Of the advantage? We appeal to
every northern conscience, if one cent of
northern capital, one sinew Of northern labor,
one branch of northern industry had, by direc.
ton or indirection, been shut out from one
acre Of the French or Mexican acquisitions,
would you have submitted Would you have
pronounced it just? To take your money to
buy me property, is Of the essence Of tyranny
Though | may have the power to do il, it is
fragrant injustice in the sight Of God and man.
How, then, was it just to buy Territory with
the money Of the North and South, and permit
the Northto choose anyphere ,oithin IL, for plant.
ing lis industry, and developing its power, while
the South with ns labor, its social habits, its
industry, were excluded from the larger part Of
it2 Instead Of establishing justice" it " es-
tablshed Injustice" as the law Of the land
and placed this unjust legislation in that su-
premacy, which was due alone to the Constitu-
ton.
Its ineqality was manifest, and in union
Of equals, established by equals, the creation
of inequality must not only be unjust but is
the proof Of un~arranted exercise Of poicer
How can the creature Of equals make its
creators nnequoi7 II the thing formed may
not say TO him who formed it, " why hast thou
made me tbus7" how shall the thing formed
attempt to form anew its creator7 That which