The Buchanan County guardian. (Independence, Buchanan County, Iowa) 1858-1864, 1860-04-25

/ cry, and The policy they pursued was one
! of discrimination against the system.
Southern men freely admit that such was
the policy of the founders of the govern
ment, but they insist that the fathers did
not understand the subject. All know
how persistenlly the early Representatives
in Congress refused the petitions of the
people of the Territories of Ohio, Indi-
ana and Illinois to allow Slavery to be
introduced into the Northwes Territory.
All know what restrictions they threw
around the system in the Territory Of
Orleans, where they were prohibited from
abolishing it by the deed of cession re-
strictions which, so far as that territory
was concerned, abolished both the for
eign and domestic save trade. These,
and many other facts which might be
adduced, leave us no doubt as to how
The trainers Of the constitution, and
those who were its earliest expounlers,
understood its relation to this system.
Those acts, with the opinions of Presi-
dents. cabinet officers, statesmen, and
eminent jurists, contemporary with the for
nation of the constitution, show that the
original policy Of the government was
identical with that of the present Repub
lican party, and that therefore that party
is the true constitutional party of the
country. Here we join issue with our
neighbour We ask his evidence for the
assertion that Northern Democrats occu-
py the original position Of the trainers
of the constitution
Our neighbor places a great deal Of
stress upon willing acquiescence in the
decisions Of the Supreme Court, and asks
if we can answer for ourself and party
that we are willing to take the constitu-
ton for our guide, and abide by the de
cisions Of the Supreme Court on ali dis
puted points. Most undoubtedly the
Republican party takes the constitution
for lis guide, and abides by its require
ments. Whether it acknowledges the
Supreme Court as absolute arbiter of po-
litical questions, as well as those of law
and equity, is quite another thing. There
is much room to doubt whether the fran
ers of the constitution ever intended to
invest au irresponsible body, like the Su-
preme Court, with such imperial powers
powers making it more absolute in its
supremacy than any judicial tribunal that
has ever existed For ourself, we can
find nothing in the constitution expressly |
granting such powers, and knowing how
guarded the trainers of that instrument
were in delegating powers away from
the people, we cannot think they intend
ed to make the most irresponsible tribu-
nal in the country the most absolute
THOMAS JEFFERSON always proteste
against the assumption Of the infalibility
of the Supreme Court, and contended
that that tribunal has no more right to
interpret the constitution for the Leeisla-
tive and Executive branches of the gov
eminent than they for it. He argued
that each department was alike equal and
independent, and for itself must Judge of
the constitutiona)ity OF the laws with
out appeal or control from its co ordinate
branches" He treated, as did also the
country, the Sedition Law as unconsti-
tutional, which the Supreme Court had
decided 10 be constitutional. ANDREW
JACKSON also, while President, refused 10
recognize as constitutional the charter of
the United States Bank. although the Su-
prcme Court had decided that 1t was SO.
He. too, contended that each department
of the government is equal and indie
pendent and is required 10 decide for it !
self what is, and what is not, consttu-
iional. Mr.. BUCHANAN himself, in the
Senate, July 7, l84l, said
But even if the judiciary had settled The
question, should never hold myself bound by
their decision while acting in a legislative
character. Unlike the Senator from MIssachu-
sets Mr.. Bates,) shall never consent to place
the political rights aud privileges of the people
into the hands OF any Judicial tribunal"
This is all good Democratic authority,
and although Mr.. BUCHANAN, at the be.
hest Of the slave power, has seen fit to
warp round to the other side, the change
does not detract from the strength Of his
first position. The position of JErFER-
son and JACKSON has always been upheld
and endorsed by the Democratic party,
until very recent date, and we have yet
to see valid reason for its reputation
now. Five states of the Union, New
York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Georgia,
and Wisconsin, have refused 10 submit to
even the legal supremacy Of the federal
judiciary, and The House Of Representa-
tives refused to be bound by decision
Of the Supreme Court 1t will thus be