New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-03-14
,,n,,r,.,,o.or ~, CONSTITUTION.

rneu
he,e s -betbtr they sse sufficient TO authorize ibis
Govt 10 m, CT: into this csrse Of the Constanon 70
exc. p,On Of tie exclusion or soSsnce OF slavery no'
found therein nor % any otter part OF ths' nsflsn
no. found in il, must be admitted 70 be MISTER a.
tended With gIeat difficulty. And the Ofhcuity "a
crt aces With the importance Of the in,runen1 ana Ine
msgnitDde and pleIiy Of the interests lnV2Vec 10
i.s constiucaop 10 allow ms 70 oe W. ,d
cis Interpretation nposible becaote judicial Tribunals
ss rueb c.r not decide upon political cJnsiderslons
Poins Ies. oDs have not the requisite certainty % ~
ford ules Of hurdle Interpretation. They are different
in rent uep. They ere different in the came men
al different tines. And when ttrct Dterpretauoo OF
the Constitution according TO TIE liked rnes whico
govern the Interpretation Of AVE, Is sosn.Unea a1o
he theoretical opinions Of individuals are allowed 10
control s me snfpg, have no longer aCoDs;t1ton;
Ne are under the government Of individual men WHO,
for the time being, have power 10 declare Wna me
Constitution H. according tother own views OF what
Il oupbt 10 mean. When such method Of ihterpreta-
ron Of the Constitution obtains, In place o. re-
publcsn goven ment with limited and Defined po Fers
We have government which s merely On exponent
Of re will of Congress; or what in my opinion,
would not be preferable, an exponent OF the IN
disidua political opinions Of the members OF this
Court.
II il can be shown by anything in the Constitution
i,e that when 1t confers Or Congress TIE power 70
make all dful rules and regulations respecting the
errtoJy belonging the United States the exclusion
or the allowance OF Slavery was excepted; or any
tb;no IN the history Of this provision tends to show
tbat sucb an exc ption was Intended by those VINO
framed end adopted the Consultation TO be introduced
into il hold il 10 be my duty carefully 10 consider
and TO allow iu.t weight TO such considerations IN H.
ttypretipg the poitve text Of the Constitution But
where the Cor stuton has said all needfu rules and
regulations must find something more tn an theoreu-
cal reasoning 10 induce me TO cay II did not mean all
There have been eminent Instances in this Court,
closely analogous to this 10 which such An attempt
10 introduce exception not found IN the Constitution
itelf has failed OF success.
By the eighth section of the first article Congress
has the power Of exclusive aton In all cases what
soeveT within this D-rct.
In The case of LoughbOrough sgt Blake % Whel.
32 the question arose whether Congress has power 70
inpoee direct taxes on persons aud property in this Dis
trct 1t was insisted that, though the grsu of power
was in its terms, broad enough to include direct tax
alton must be limited by the principle that ration
and representation are insepsrable 1t would not be
ea.y TO fix on any political truth better established or
more fully admitted IN our country than that txstlon
and tsion IDust EXIT together We went into
the war Of the Revolution to3sssert and lis incor
pors.ed &c fundamental into all American govern
men,s But however true and important this maxim
may be- II IL not necessarily of universal apple iton
1t was for the people of the United States who for ned
the Constitution to decide whether It should or should
not be permitted to operate within this District Tner
decision was embodied in the words OF the Constitu-
tom and that contain ed no such exception es would
permit the maxim to operate in this District ths Court
Interpreting that language held that the exception DID
not exist.
Again the Constitution confers Congress power to
regulate commerce with foreign nations Under this,
Congress passed act the I'D OF Decembel, loU',
unlimited In Duration laying an embargo on all SHIPS
and vessels in the ports OF within the limits and urisdic
ton of the United Satee. No law OF the United States
ever pressed severely upon particular States;
Though the consttutionaty of the law was contested
with earnesIess and zeal proportioned to the rum
ous effects which felt from it, and though, as Mr.
Chief Justice Marshall has said e Whea, '9@ " no
"waIt of acuteness in discovering objections TO a
"measure 10 which they felt the most deeprOoed hoe
20 eli will 10 IN
Opposition TO this not that the fact that
II prohibited the Of particular species OF property
belonging almost exclusivelyto citizens OF few States
ard this indie nitey, ever supposed TO show that 1t
was unconstitutional Something much more stringent,
as ground Of legal judgment, was relied on-that the
power TO regulate commerce did not include the power
to bnnihilate commerce
But the decision wee that under the power to regu
late commerce. the power Of Congress over the subject
restricted only by those exceptions and intatops
contained in the Constitution; and as neither the cause
in question, which q general grant OF power TO
regulate commerce, any other clause of the Con
sttutiop imposed any restriction as to the duration OF
embargo. an unlimited prohibition OF the use OF the
shipping Of the country within the power of Con-
gress. On this subject Mr. Justice Daniel, speaking
fr the Court in the of United States VS.. hargold
g How. 56O), says:
"COptr. BY the COphitution vested with the pow.,
peoss high sPplo.iOn Of The tenn. 70
ton NAV have been saesonsd ye passage
sSs these statutes have received can scarcely ct tb.
day open doubt that subject falling Iesiimaely
within tie spere Of commercial regulation be psrt ~
wholly excluded when either meaure shall be demanded BY
the safety or the Interests OF the entire nson Inc
Of which the legislative oscretions apply it."
II power TO regulate commerce extends to an ndei
mite prohibition Of the Of all vessels belonging to
citizens of the several States may operate without
cepOn, upon every subject of commerce to which the
legislative discretion may apply it, upon what grounds
can say that the power to make all needful rules and
regulations respecting the territory of the United States
"a IN az
ton OF Slavery therein!
While the regulation Is one respecting the terri
tory" while it Is in the Judgment of Congress, 80
Deedful regulation, and Is thus completely within the
words Of the grant, while other cause of the Con-
stituton be shown which requires the insertion of
an exception respecting Slavery and while the prsc,
cal construction for period Of upward of City years
forbids such exception, II would In my opinion vio
late every sound rule of Interpretation to force til
ception into the Constitution upon the strength Of sb
stract political reasoning, which We are bound to be.
leve the people Of the United States thought Insult.
cient to induce them to limit the power Of Congress-
because what they hsve said contains no such linn
itston.
Before proceed further to notice some other grounds
Of supposed objection to this power Of Congress- de.
sire to say that If ii were not for my anxiety to insist
upon what deem correct exposition Of the Constitu-
ton, looked only to the purposes Of the argument
the source of the power Of Congress asserted in the
opinion Of the majority OF the Court would snswe those
purposes equally wen. For they admit that Congress
has power to organize and govern the Territories until
tney kIlve al suitable conoton Tor admission TO the
Unions they admit also, that the kind of government
which shall thus exist should be regulated by the con-
dition and wants of each Territory and that it is ne
cessary committed to the discretion of Congress to
enact such laws for the purpose that discretion NAV
dictate and no limit to that discretion has bet shown
suggested those positive prohibitions 10
leRislste, which are found In the Constitution.
! confess myself unable to perceive any difference
whatever between my own opinion of the gener Al e1.
tent of the power Of Congress and he opinion of the
majority OF the Court that consider deriyable
from the express language of the Constitution while