The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-01-18

for the purpose of repeating ~ the ieAC uay
and the people naturally consider TINS !, an esi-
dence otignorance and unstatesmal-iiAe coii-
duct. 80 o,ao,
Mr.. PILE, of Missouri, medc q point OF order
that the gentleman was out OF order, as the
conduct OF members of the House was not per-
tnent to the issue under consideration.
The SPEAKER (Mr. Latin occupying the chair
temporarily. The gentleman a;!asa;oH must Sonhne
himself to the questioh unSer Ssh ceor,v
in order, and he should continue the same hne
of argument unless he vas decided out OF
order. ),
The SPEAKER would not decide the gentle
man out Of order.
Mr. MARSHALL resuminf, said the people at
largo did not believe that this House had
superabundance OF either intelligence or
patriotism; at least they (o not accord them
sufficient intelligence to he proper judges OF
what should constitute majority or the gu,
preme Court in passing upon constltuulolai
questions. And he would say the people were
right, although he might be included IN tne
number who were designat ed as not,possessing
sufficient intelligence, but he would not pre-
tend that his ability was sufficient to recon-
struct the Supreme Court In conclusion, Mi.
Marshall implored the House not to pass this
unconstitutional measure, for it certainly SEEM
ed OF the most revolutionary character, ana no
intelligent m'nd could consider u otner%lse.
AR. SpAuIDINa. of Ohio, said he had great
respect for the Law and for those who admins
tered it. and as he was classed among the
moderate men Of the House, he hoped that
sou,u respect would be p~!d to his OPINION upon
| this subject. Some tweNe months ago ne De-
came cognizant Of the fact that the gentleman ~
| from Pennsylvania MIR. Wlhans) mad l 1ll
prepared like the one introduced to-day. Inc
bin in i:s inception, struck him Mr.. Spauid-
ing) as one that would be beneficial to the
| conntry at large, but he objected then, ana ne
| objects now. to law which would require all
the members Of the Supreme Court to unite In
O Judgment calculated to impair an act Oh Coh-
gress. L.. .,;,ds 10 the
bencb should be made thu number OF Judges
necessary. he was therefore prepared to vote
for the bill as reported by the committee on tne
| indicorv and he came to Jhe conclusion 10 vote
fOr it after full analysis OF the CONSTITUTION
itself. When bill passed both houses OF Con
gress and received the signature Oh the fresi-
dent. it became the law of the land: When both
houses passed bill and the presidential veto
was interpo sed, the constitution stlil proVloesa
n remedy. and by vote Ct two-thirds OF both
bouses the bill could become the law Oh the
land in spite Of the veto. Now. the supreme
Courts at present composed Of eight members,
and there is provision taat when anotnor va
cancy occurs the number shall be hxeu atseVeh
members. ,.;
bill and its passage by two-thrds vote OF
Coneress the question to test its constitution
ality would carry it to the Supreme Court,
where with seven members there might De
three in favor and three against its constltu-
tionality, and it would at last devolve upon one
man To declare law unconstitutional that had
been passed by two-thirtls OF Congress, for IN
nm enual division the fout man would go one
way or the other. This 0ne-man power might
operate also to set aside = law passed by Con-
gress and approved by the President;
mfr. SpAULDINa continued, and said tnat the
only question for consideration ID tnls maSVel !:
was whether Congress had right to pass tnls
act, and whether the Supreme Court could set
this act itself aside by declaring 1t unconstl-
tutional. He contended that Congress nad tne
right, and that the court could not Set tne
law aside. Nor had he o doubt but that the
court would approve OF the act. were nc a
member Of the court, ha would certainly ap-
prove of ii. Nor dld he believe, as Mr. Mar
shall would have il, that the people would q Gus
approve of what Congress. might do In tins
MIR. WILSON, of Iowa, here offered another
amendment, providing that IT the Circuit or
District Courts OF the United States shoulo
adiudge an act OF Congress to be unconstltu-
tional. and it should be carried to the supreme
Court for review, and two-thlrds OF the Su
prene Court should not ratify the action oil
The court below, then such decision OF the
court below should be declared reversed,
MIR. BINGHAM, OF Ohio, said he had hoped
that the discussion upon this subject woulo
not have partaken at I'LL of partisan character:
BE did not know by what right MIR: Marshall
assumed to pass judgment upon all the lie.
publican members Of the House In the name OF
The people of the United States. The people
of the country could epeak for themselves.
and when they did speak they would be neard,
and there was no appeal from their decision 70
either Congress or the Supreme OouIs. m mSGh U,'
had been said about the reputation OF the su-
nreme Court. but that court had never been
challenged until 1t descended from the consid-
Grafton of purely legal questions to questions
of politics. with which it had nothing IN the
world to do.
Mr.. MARSHALL asked who was to decide upon
political questions involving questions on con-
stitutional law.
Mr. BINGHAM replied that the court had in
the early days OF It's existence decided that
question for itself. He wonld ask, IN turn,
where the court obtained the power to rise
above the will Of the people?
MIR. MARSHALL replied that he never con,
tended that the court could rise above tne VIII
of the people, but it is the gentleman (Mr.
Bingham) and his party who desire that such
an end as that shall be accomplished. ,
Mr.. BINGHAM denied the right OF the gentle
man to saw that he or his party desired that,
or that the party trampled upon the rights OF
the Supreme Court. 1t would be o sad DAY for
the institutions Of this country when the right
of the court to override the people was recog-
nized. The court, attempted 1t once, when It
declared that there wall class Of people IN
this country whose rights the white man was
not bound to respect.
MIR. PRuYN and MIR. MiRsHAIL (interrupting)
said the court had never so decided.
MIR, BINGHAM said he understood these OBJ
jsctions; but nevertheless, an appeal was taken
in that case to the people, who pronounced
such a decree of condemn nation upon that de-
cison as was never heard of since the day
when our ancestors in England gave merited
punishment to the infamous Jeffries In Eng
land. The American people, by tho power OF
the ballot, pronounced well marited Judg-
ment upon the American Jeffries; and the peo-
ole have to-day the power, if they choose to ex-
ercise it, Of annihilating this Supreme Court,
or of reducing the court to single member,
II they choose so to do.
The precedent Of this action, Mr. Bingham
contended, had been fixed in the First Congress.
We have the right to pess this bill, ard he, for
one, would not stop to look at the consequences.
He would only CONSIDER the consequences that
would follow in tho event of decision as law
less as that above referred to. 1t has been as
serted here and elewheIe that the fundamen-
tal law of the land caprot be touched, and it
has been proclaimed FIR and wide, by what
authority he knew not, That q majority OF the
court would decide the Reconstruction acts un-
constitutional
Let them do 80, and there will be another
appeal to the people. He was prepared to
oncent the issue and to say that the funda-