Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1860-09-29
A Government of the People Subject to the
Supreme Court.

supreme OouEIs
The Commercial is anxious to know what
Mr.. Douglas will do about it, il the Supreme
Court decide that Territory can not exclude
slavery. What would the Commercial do
about it2 The question is peculiarly brill
liant, as the Commercial itself can not say
what it would do in such a case, except to
submit; and can have nothing to say, no
matter which way the question is answered.
The tortuous course of politics has led all
parties into a trap, where they are forced to
set up the Supreme Court as supreme over
the Constitution; and professions of entire
submission to the decisions of that tribunal
are set up as the test of fidelity to the Union.
It did not use to be so, except among the
extreme Federalists in the bitter strife be-
tween that and the original Republican
party under the lead of Jefferson. -Jeffer-
sln denounced the doctrine, from the organ
ilation of the Government, as long as he
lived, as the danger that threatened the SUBJ
version of the Constitution, and the subec-
ton of the popular branch of the Govern
ment to an irresponsible tribunal.
Now one finds Democracy exalting the
distinguishing and worst doctrine of the
Federalists; and men with the worship of
Jefferson on their lips, announcing the doc
trine which he hated most, as the end and
apotheosis of our institutions. But there is
now no Republican party to fight this
danger. To resist it would be called a dis
regard of law, and treason against the Con-
stitution, and the Republicans are cowed by
this charge, and profess submission to the
decision of the Court, until its decisions are
reversed.
Jackson, the founder of the Democratic
party, declared that his official oath was to
support the Constitution as he understood it,
claiming an equal right with the judiciary to
interpret the plain letter of an instrument,
so plain and simple that any man of
common sense can understand it. He
was denounced as an usurper,
tyrant and traitor, but the people sus-
tanned him, and his position was the Demo-
cratic doctrine of that day. Now factions,
calling themselves the ancient, time-honored
Democracy, profess to hold their political
opinions subject to the Supreme Court; and
one of them has plank in its platform, de-
clariDg that its great, distinctive, eternal
principle, which is to give the country peace
forever from the slavery agitation, is entirely
subject to decision of the Supreme Court.
There is no party that dare denounce this
surrender of our Constitution and the popu-
lar branch of the Government to an ire
sponsible tribunal, chosen originally by a
partisan President from the most unscrupu-
ious and serviceable politicians, and holding
their places by life-tenures. Is it possible that
our boasted capacity of selfgovernment and
our model Republic have eliminated in an
irresponsible oligarchY, the meanest in its
origin and the most odious in its form that
ever existed?
The object of written constitution is
that it may be fixed and positive in its char
acter, so ms to be above the power of any
department of Government. To this end it
must be simple in its provisions, and plain
and precise in its language. Ours is model
in that respect. The wayfaring man, though
fool, need not err in its meaning. 1t no
more requires Supreme Court to interpret
it than to interpret the A B G. Legal ques-
tions arise in the administration of laws, and
when personal rights are at stake, persons
have right to bring their cases before the
Courts; but Congress is not subordinate to
the Supreme Court in its legislation. Con-
gress has the right to decide upon the con-
stitutionality of its own acts and its acts
can not come before the Court for revision
except when individual rights have been
damaged so as to make a case for legal adju-
dication. @
Then, if difference arises between Con-
gress and the Court as to the Constitution,
which shall be supreme? The department
nearest to the people, or that entirely re-
moved from their control Which would the
genius of democratic Government trust,
the representatives of the people, who are
subjectto their approval every two years,
and to their instructions always, orr tribunal
which is placed out of their reach, by Exec
utive appointment, for life? Will the people
say they are not to be trusted, but must have
an absolute power to rule over them Most
certainly not. 1t is only the desperate strife
of reckless politicians for office that calls on
iespotic power to save the country. There
need be no question as to the constitution
lity ofpolitical measures. 1t is only fraud
tat has raised any; but the people and their
rect representatives are the ultimate
5iters of the constitutionality of their acts.
Zen it becomes necessary to yield this
1T to absolute and irresponsible power, in
shape, let us have single despot whose
can be cleayed at one stroke, instead of
ie-headed oligarchy, enshrining judicial
my, the most hateful of all tyrannies, in
luctity of the judicial ermine.
Amusements of the Police.