New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-02-08
TIE ENROLLMENT ACT AND THE
SUPREME COiRT.

An insurreotionary journal in this city once
more proposes that the Enrolment Act shall be
tested before the Supreme Court of tho United
States, as a condition precedent TO It's execution.
by made up case between the President
and Governor Seymour. The proposition be-
travs an ignorance OF tho character and
functions OF the Judiciary. and OF the or
binary presumptOns Of law concerning acts
of Congress 1t assumes that tho Judiciary
is part of the law-making power; that an act OF
Congress has no real validity until It's constitu-
tionality has been affirmed by the Supreme
Court; and that the people have the night, II II
be not their duty, TO resist the enforcement oil
any law which decision Of that Court has not
sanctioned. If the naked statement Of such
proposition il absurd, il is the fault OF those who
have heretofore urged it-not ours.
We trust il will not be thought impertinent
if we suggest to the Conservatives who
favor this proposition that they should really
read the Constitution, and endcayor TO compre-
bend the elementary principles which 1t en-
bodies. Article |. Section J, is this:
"a" legislative power, herein granted shall b. vested In
Congress, of United Saie' which shall cOn't 81 Senate
ana House Of Representative"
AA legislative powers are vested in Congess;
and Congress consists OF Senate and House of
Representatives; and the Supreme Court does
not constitute any part Of it, nor is invested
with any legislative functions whatever. In
the 7th section OF the same article il is provided
Al. Ioc.ro - I.nn,,a cEoll Io m
proved by the President, or, if vetoed, shall be
repassed by two-thirds Of each House; but ii is
nowhere provided that it shall be submitted TO
the Supreme Court. A bill once passed by
Congress and approved by the President is a
law, and the Constitution enjoins upon the
President to take care that it be faithfully exc
cuted.
But a Law does sometimes come before
the Supreme Court Yes, in this way.
The frst section of the third article OF the
Constitution vests the judcial-not legislative
power of the United States i'll one Supreme
Court, and in such inferior Courts a. Congress
may establish. The second and third sections
define with precision the limits Of this Judicial
power. 1t is declared to extend 10 certain
enumerated leases" aud controversies"
and it docs not extend to any others. The
SgprcIne Court has no control over The iegisla-
ton or laws Of the Union, except such as it gets
incidentally, and indirectly. it, proper bust
nes' Ike that Of other Courts, is 10 decide the
causes which come before it in the regular adj
miniStraton Of justice. Those causes some
times depend upon tie construction or rpon the
validity OF certain statutes and if in order justly
to determine the cause it is necessary to pass
upon the statute, it is often the duty of the Court
to examine int" the c0nstitutionality of the
statute. And there is no other way in which
constitutional question can legally be presented
to the Court, or in which the Court can assume
political jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court dlie.s in this respect
from the tribunals OF other countries. Ia i
England, for instance an Act Of Parliament il
binding upon the Courts absolutely. They have
no power to question its validity; they must
interpret it, apply it to tho facts of given case,
and obey it. Parliament is supreme. But in
the United States the Constitution is supreme,
and an Act OF Congress has no legal force or
validity il II coatsaVeae' any pyoVie,oa Vi thoI