Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1871-07-28

amendments themselves. IL Ia more
roundabout and hedged up but the De-
mocracy is evidently bent on walking In It.
A law of Congress designates the Secre-
tary of State as the proper official TO for
mally make known the ratification of q
constitutional amendment. His duty Is
merely declaratory, not judicial. As a
matter of fact not one of the fifteen declar
ations thus far made by the Secretary of
State has ever been called in question but
such an issue could be raised. The Con-
stitution prescribes that an amendment
submitted to the State Legislatures can
only be adopted by the mdorsment of q
three-fourths majority. Should It be
doubtful whether the requisite indorse.
ment had been received, the question
would have to be decided by the Supreme
Court of the United States 1t follows,
therefore, that If the Democrats could
control the Judiciary, they could nullify
the amendment, which they still insist
were never legally ratified. Those who
profess to accept these amendments are
careful in the method and extent of their
acceptance. They are in force to day, and
must remain 80 until set aside IL the way
mentioned. This Is incontestable, and the
acceptance of the more progressive Demo
crat goes no farther. If in position to act
at all, the whole party would join in ju-
dicial plot to overthrow the entire recon.
struction part of our laws, organic and
statutory. Not word can be found in
| all the platforms and editorials of the new
departure intimating the contrary, while
there are continual outcroppings of the
plot itself Even the cautious New York
World cannot keep the secret. In re.
cent article it pronounced the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth Amendments the "off.
spring of gross usurpation of power
passed by force, fraud and peridy" If a
majority of the Supreme Court took the
same position, the amendments could be
blotted out of existence.
There remains only one point to con
slider in this connection: Has the peril OF
constitutional notification limit in time,
or must perpetual guard be kept over the
two last amendments to prevent their de-
structionS Although no attempt was ever
made to judicially nullify any part of the
| Federal Constitution, and no exact prece-
dent can be pointed out, the principle in.
volved is well established. We can best
state it by an illustration The Constitu.
ton of California, like our own, requires
that the title of law shall correspond with
the nature of the law ITSELF This provis.
ion was habitually ignored by several leg
islatures before test case was brought
into court. The defense admitted that the
Constitution had not been complied with
but showed that the same was true in mum
herless other cases, and that if at that late
day that clause of the Constitution should
be enforced d, the evil in the upsetting Of the
existing orler of things would be i'm
mense. 1t was further shown that thi:
latter consideration had in many cases de-
tered courts from doing what they woulC
otherwise have done. This defense wa!
held valid. According to the rule showr
to have found general acceptance in the
best courts of this country aud England
it will, in few years, be too late to 81
much as entertain the question of tn,
validity of these amendments. II the De
mocracy cannot carry the next Presiden
tial and Congressional elections, it will b,
too late in 1876 TO raise this political issue
There is, in other words, only one way lef
to set aside the new features of the COnsti
tuition, and if the next attempt to open u
the path should fail, that would end, alto
gether and forever, the reconstruction
issue. We are all weary Of it, and lon
for rest or change, but there must be N
disarmament until the battle has bee
fought and won in 1872 Chicago Journa