National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1876-11-30
Lord, Save Us From Lavysrs.

Tome Editor or me NdftondI Repubttesn:
SIR: Vermont by q majority of % 900 has,
Just declared that she does not want TIlden to
be President Of the United States. In re-
publican form Of government where the. peo-
pie are supposed to rule that means something.
Now, Democratic lawyers come along aud say
because one of the Republican electors was
postmaster on the day of election, therefore g
the % 900 majority of Vermont shall, in bis
case, mean nothing, or, promising that Hayes q
has carried Louisiana, South Carolina AMI .
Florida, that Vermont shall be made to count
Nlden into the Presidency. Truly, though
''the spirit may make alive, the letter killeth."
And this reversal of the popular Judgment is
to result from legal bubble as to when an .
"elector" Is appointed" Nothing can be
clearer to my mind that the mere election is o.
not an appointment. "No Senator, Repre-
sentative or person holding an Office of trust
or profit under the United States shall be sp--
pointed an elector." Construe this strictly,
and the citizen who votes for postmaster as
elector commits crime. The only object of
excluding the above classes from the electoral
colleges is to prevent those colleges being
composed of men who will be under the -un-
due Influence of the incoming President. Re-
signstion before
ACCEPTANCE OF THE POSITION:
Of elector effectually secures the desired ,ob-
ject. Why then defeat the popular will: by a
technicalityl All elective officers are inducted
into Office under an oath, and Of most Of them.
bonds are required. Before complying with
these conditions they are only officers elect,
as also an "elector" Is only an eleetor-elect
until he accepts the position by soms act of
his own confirming the action OF the majority
of the voters of his respective State.
Lawyers developed into judges, are such
strict constructionists that human rights are
always in danger of being curtailed by the
judiciary. I have q Jeffersonians fear of q
Judiciary which has power to sit IN judgment
upon political questions. Only the power
which makes the laws should have the power
to unmake them. Segrezate men as judges,
and they come to look upon every law as q
necessary evil, to be construed strictly, and as
they exercise their metaphysical brains to see,
how few subjects can be brought under the
operations Of certain laws, they seem to forget
that legislatures do not really make the laws.
but that all laws spring from tbs people, en-
bodying not only certain words, but also. the
popular aspirations and desires. II they
realized this, many laws would be construed so.
literally that those aspirations and desires
would have full play accorded to them. The
recent Supreme Court decisions on the enforce
ment act are cases In point.
The ''tathers" who framed the Constitution
were great men, but wisdom did not die. with
them. II they had claimed for themselves one
half the wisdom we attribute to them, they
would have been earth's sublimest cyclists.
Hasten the day when our reverence for them
will be so sensible that we shall follow out
their suggestions, and thoroughly and fully
revise their work. So long as that Constitu-
ton makes 1t almost impossible to put citi-
zen directly under the protection Of the ma
tional flag, so long we should not worship It
as our fetish.
Pending that surely coming revision, let It
be understood that It is our Constitution, and
not the Constitution of the fathers that gov
ems US. It is the supreme law Of the land,
not because the fathers framed and ratified 1t,
but because every year we ratify 1t afresh.
Having full power to change 1t at any time,
It is binding upon US solely because we have
not seen ct to change It. Our annual neglect
to change It Is equivalent to an annual rerati-
Hcation thereof. From these self-evident
truths It Is plain that our courts should now
CONSTITUTE THAT NsTauNzNT
not merely or mainly in the light Of the faith
ers' opinions, but of the opinions of the pres
ent generation.
The fathers may have intended that the
ELECTORS" should vote for whomsoever they
please without regard to the popular wishes
expressed at the ballot box; but who believes
that that Is the present received interpreta-
toni II we had ever conceived It probable
that f'electors" would nullify the popular
will, the Constitution would have been
amended fifty years ago. ANY Interpretation
of that instrument that will allow electors to
vote as they may please may be In harmony
with the Constitution of the fathers, under
which we are not living, but will not be IN
harmony with our Constitution, which Is alone
the present "supreme law of the land"
Is not this claiming that the trainers and
original ratifers of the Constitution intended
TO confer upon "electors' the right to act
without reference to the expressed wishes OF
the people, q begging of the question: Where
does the Constitution support this claim
Was not the main object Of the electoral col
lege to provide for choosing President and
Vice President in case of the premature death
Of those officers electi 1t is because lawyers,
both Of the bench and bar, are go slow 20
grasp the spirit of our institutions that say.
II. T. johns.