Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-05-30

L
Their in our next.
THE PAST: THE GREAT TEACHER.
Mr.. JEFFERSON had assailed the indie
pendence Of the judiciary and i'm
peached the integrity of Chief Justice
MARSHALL, in the case Of BURR, not
because he himself believed the impu-
tation true, n o from passion, but upon
cold calculation and for political effect,
as he had assailed the character Of
WASHINGTON. JACKSON, heated by op-
position, with the natural impetuosity
and reeklessuess of his character, OPP
posed himself to the decision Of the Su-
preme Court, because it stood in his way;
and he was sustained by his party, espe-
cialIy in the South. When the Supreme
! Court of Wisconsin decided the fugitive
slave law unconstitutional, it only acted
on his principle, and construed the con-
stitution for itself,
It was the Court Of APgeals Of VIR-
GINA that first refused to obey a man
date of the Supreme Court Of the United
States; as it was South Carolina that
refused to permit a suit to be brought by
an agent from Massachusetts, to test in
the Courts the right Of negroes, il sc-
cepted as citizens by Massachusetts, to
the privileges of citizenship in the Pal
metto State, or, at least, to freedom from
arrest there. She should have had the
question tried and if it were decided
that under the Constitution negroes
could be made citizens, and so force them
selves as citizens on the Southern States,
then she should have seeded, because it
Uds so, and because she eve meant to
enter into any such compact. There
was no wisdom in trying to avoid the
issue. Sooner or later it had to be met.
Whenever any people casts down the
barriers of its own safety, it cannot COM
plain when they are afterwards over
Ieaped by its enemies. The Kamtschat-
kan savage who beats and kicks his
idols when they are so unjust as to sffiict
him with storm and snow, cannot claim
LLAhL OluEIH bnOulu AhCh ACNEAV hAD kOu6f
when be sets them again in their places
and wOrships them upon the advent of
good weather. The South should have
frowned Indignantly upon the first at
tempt, no matter how insidious or by
whom, to impair the efficiency and in
dependence OF the Supreme Court. Bet
ter have stripped the Judges Of their
robes, and let them be pulled by the beard
by the tatterdemalions Ofthe Five Points,
as those of Rome's Senators were by the
Gauls of Brennus, than itself have set
their decisions at nought by q formal act
and instrument Of reputation, under its
hand and seal. When JACKSON pro-
posed to draw the sword against South
Carolina, for multiplying within her limits
the authority of an act of Congress, and
yet claiming to remain in the Union, he
proposed to punish her for doing an act
precisely equivalent to his own when he
refused to be governed in his official
action by q decision of the Supreme
Court. When the South sowed thistles,
it could not reasonably expect to reap
wheat.
As the President will always be
tempted TO place partizans on the Bench,
whose opinions on constitutional ques-
tons of a political character will always
be known before, will never change, and
will therefore never be regarded with re-
spect as judicial, some other mode of
selection should be adopted. The Presi-
dent should have nothing to do with it.
The plan Of packing the Supreme Court,
as juries are packed, has been tried long
enough. The Democrats did it for many
years, and now the Republicans are de-
it. 1t is a shameful failure.
The Chief Justices of the Supreme
Courts OF the States snould be made, by
the Constitution, a Board Of Appoint
ment, and should fill all vacancies on
the Supreme Bench of the United
OF they should present to the
President OF Senate, for each vacancy,
three names, of judges, or lawyers, each
from a different State, one of whom
should be selected. If any mode could
secure honest, impartial, learned and
able judges, free of any suspicion Of par
tizanship, this would do it.
The Court should also be divided into
chambers; and then the judge selected
for q particular chamber would be chosen
with a view to his qualifications and
learning in that particular branch of the
.aw.
One thing is certain. Nothing could
worse than the present constitution
arrangement Of the Court, unless
judges were elected by the people,
md for short terms.
M questions, except those Of law,
in any case, Of appellate juris-
be submitted to the Supreme
court. In each case, the opinion of the
Court should be pronounced, and no
or argument or criticism Of an
Individual judge be given. Our whole
ystem Of deciding cases is vicious. There
3 too much augmentation. Opinions
re too prefix and dissenting opinions
an intolerable nuisance. No Judge
hould be allowed to express his dissent
any judgment of the Court; and
o make il known that he did dissent,
hould be sufficient ground for impeach-
nent or removal. The public is only
oncerned to know, like the parties TO
be suit, what the Court DEGREES the law
0 be, and not what this or the other I
agreeing or not agreeing with his !
rethren, thinks it TO be, or how he 1
links the Court ought to have decided. {
The Tar should require brevity in the G
Of the Court, confning them TO
statement of the premises and Of the
exclusions reached, without the inter
augmentation. Then a dozen 5
ases would not fill a volume, the author :
y Of the decision would no longer he
'eRkened by loose and disjointed ram 8
ling arguments, and We should be rid of .
lose res non ddjudicate,' or matters 7
OF adjudged, and 'obiteT dictq , or cas- L
al remarks, Of which lawyers make 40 s
nfair q use, and by which unlearned I
are often 50 much confused and 4
d sstray. "