The New York herald., 1876-01-25
The Centennial Appropriation.

The Centennial Appropriation.
That the World should again mistake our
position is quite in keeping, but is of slight
consequence. It's last article contains little
beyond long quotation from Madison. as
serting that the power of appropriation is
limited by the other enumerated grants, and
a statement that jefferson held the same
view. AS this is not disputed quotations to
prove it were quite superhuous except for
making vain show of reply when resources
of argument had failed. 1t would have
been more pertinent to have quoted from
Hamilton, Marshall. Story, Kent and Web
ster, whom the World asserted, but we
denied, to be on the same side 1t after
ward corrected one of its errors by with
drawing Hamilton from the list, but the
others no more belong in it than did Hamil-
ton himself. In fact, they were all old
federalists and reverent disciples Of Hamil-
ton, except Story, and he was reverent
disciple of Marshall-that is, of Hamilton at
second hand. The hardihood of claiming
them, or any Of them, for the strict construc-
tion side is a curious illustration of the value
of our contemporary's opinions, or, rather,
its assertions, on topics connected with our
constitutional history and Jurisprudence
The World thinks it piece of presump-
tion for us to say that a view held by Jeffer-
son, Madison, and ITSELF 'discloses an
adequate conception of the constitution.
Our apology is that our four greatest jurists-
Marshall, Kent, Story and Webster--held
the strict construction view to be made
quate and false before the authors of the
theory received the recent reinforcement
which completes the above trio; and. as the
new authority has merely repeated their
well-worn arguments, it did not seem so
bold piece Of presumption to express our
dissent as the World deems it.
Chief Justice Marshall, in one of the lu-
minous and weighty constitutional opinions
which are the basis of his fame, spoke of the
Jeffersonian theory as 'that narrow con-
struction which would cripple the govern
ment and render it unequal to the objects
for which it is declared to be instituted.
So true is this that Jefferson himself, the
very author of the theory, made practical
portant and brilliant act of craftsmanship,
not merely of his own, but of every admins
tration. We, of course, refer to his purchase
of Louisiana which he believed and declared
to be unconstitutional it most certainly
was on his own principles of construction
He searched the constitution in vain for any
enumerated power which would authorize
the purchase, and professed to hope that the
instrument would be so amended as to give
an er post fdcto justification, or, as he called it,
Indemnity" This great fact in our history,
this most important and statesmanlike act
of jefferson, explodes his own theory of con-
struction, and is full practical answer to
all his casuistical metaphysics. For,
since his time, we have purchased
foreign territory again and again
without doubt or question as to
the constitutionality of such acts. Judge
Story in his Commentaries" says that there
is no pretence that the purchase or cession
of any foreign territory is within any of the
powers expressly enumerated in the consti-
tuition" He further says that ''there is no
possibility of defending the constitutionality
of this measure 1.-THE Louisiana purchased
but upon the principles of liberal construc-
ton which have been upon other occasions
so earnestly resisted"
We submit, therefore, that jefferson de-
molished his theory by his own greatest act,
and that the country has rejected his crotchet
by its unanimous Endorsement of the consti-
nationality of purchases of foreign territory