Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-01-10
dNurtestrr d9ailp Spp.

MessrS. Editors win you allow me little
space to criticise S. S. Fosters resolutions
not that there is much danger of any consid-
cradle number of our intelligent citizens ac-
cepting such really extravagant propositions
but Mr.. Foster is so sincere and earnest, as
well as able man, that his propositions seem
to be worthy of more notice than they have
heretofore received.
His first assertion, that the courts are not
the proper Interpreters Of the constitution, is
in direct opposition to the letter of the consti-
tuition ITSELF which creates the court for the
express purpose of having final adjudication
upon all matters of difference under it arising
among the various parties to it. And this
provision is natural and necessary one in all
organized society, for there must be some UNI
pire to settle differences, else all would be con-
fusion.
There may be proper criticism, perhaps,
fthpon the construction OF our present Judiciary,
Ind upon its almost irresponsible positions,
but if the constitution is to be regarded at ALL
that part which establishes the courts and de-
fines their power is not to be lightly esteemed.
His second proposition, that the constitution
is not compact is so direct denial of history
~ and existing facts as hardly to be worthy of
Consideration, were it not that on this point
turns most of his assumption in relation to
putting an anti-slavery construction upon the
United States constitution.
All smutual organizations of society are Or
gained upon compacts, express or implied,
and when there is a written-out constitution
that is compact in practical and undeniable
form. When the Pilgrims were about landing
on Plymouth Rock, they signed a regularly
drawn up Contract" which bound them till
they were more largely organized as a colony
under the Kings Charter" or contract In
IVA the thirteen colonies contracted together
for attempted mutual redress of grievances,
under the ARTICLES of association, from which
association grew the Declaration of Indepen.
dence, in 1776, and the opening Of the war of
the revolution In 1778 they further perfected
this association or compact, by adopting the
"artices of compensation" which continued
till 1889, when the compact was more COM
pletely finished by the constitution, which then
commenced its powers and has continued in
force till the present day not always properly
respected or executed, but nevertheless the
nominal, and for the most part, the real bond
and contract of union between the various
states that form the confederacy.
When this final compact was made, there
were conflicting sentiments and interests to be
adjusted and provided for. Prominent and
most difficult among them was this very ques-
ton Of slavery, Madison telling us repeatedly
that the difficulties to the completion and ex-
ecutiOn of the contract lay between the slave
and free states, slavery and its interests fixing
the line Of demarcation. But the difficulty
was adjusted, the contract between the states
was made, the slave states gaining some recog-
milton and guarantee of their assumed rights
and the tree states some supposed compensat
ing advantage And this Contract" between
freedom and slavery admitted by the agents
who made it, the people of the states ratified
it, has been acted upon and generally respected
by every successive administration, under it,
as well by all prominent statesmen and pol
iticiaps' Z How wild then the assertion that no
eonracIwas made, that now exists, and that
the SGhpact was not CONTRACT, and that act
ip&;in good faith to it, we are not bound by its
,s,xpress terms as set forth by its agreed inter.
prefer
This right of the people, in all republican
governments to make, alter, and amend their
own contracts of government, is admitted by
all, but changes should not be hastily or i'm
puisiyey made; and to guard against this the
trainers OF the constitution arranged that no
change should be made but by agreement OF
three tourths of the states. Perhaps this is
too strong Il check, but there it is, and will re-
main till legtimately rubbed out or altered.
The right of revolution underIies all consti-
buttons and governments, and inures to all
people, as a natural right, to be exercised
whenever in their judgment they cannot OBJ
tain their rights through the orderly and
agreed processes.
If Mr.. Foster means revolution, let him say
so; and if he means constitutionality, let him
abide by it till he can legitimately change it to
meet his desires.
Finally it is not the right or the duty of the
people OF the United States, by majority
vote, to put such a construction upon their
constitution os will empower the federal gov
eminent to abolish slavery in the states, be-
cause the people do not believe that such
no right to say Neither saying so or be-
lieving so would make it so, if it clearly is not
so. 1t is certainly wrong to force construction
uponsanything to accomplish partizan or other
ends, and most enormously wrong is it,
for one party to a contract, being acct
dentally in the majority to force con.
struction upon the mutual contract, against
the protests of the other party thereto,
who are in a minority and whose asserted
rights and vested interests would be destroyed
by such forced construction. Such is not fair
and honest dealing, and cannot be defended at
all upon any hypothesis save that the end sane
titles the means, which Mr.. Foster heartily
repudiates.
Mr. Fosters illustrations of popular violations
of the constitution, do not sustain his case, for
these have been popular, universally accepted
by all classes, at the last, and direct violations
OF the express letter of the constitution, but
never destructive of the vested rights of any
of the parties to it, as would be the case with
Mr.. Fosters proposition.
When majority of both parties in interest
propose to change contract, let it be done.
When a majority of the south, acting with a
majority of the north, propose an anti.savery
constitution, let us by all means have it, but
then, instead of new constructions, trying to
call black white, let us rub out the black and
put the white in its place, for calling it white
must make it so.
If the present contract is bad, throw it up,
and holding ourselves responsible for damages,
try to make new and better one, or do with
out entirely. But for one party, being ma
jorty, to force false construction upon the
other party, which is a minority is direct
violation of the obligations of contracts, and
ought not to be countenanced by any honest
man. II.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS.