St. Landry democrat., 1892-02-06
The Anti-Lottery Postal Law

The most purified and canonized ant
ought to feel satisfied with the decision
of the Supreme Court Of the United
States in the two cases lately argued
before it, in which the freedom OF the
press formed the subject matter Of in.
vcstigation. The Court holds that the
Constitution gives Congress the right
to establish post roads and offices, and
that the right to do SO necessarily i'm
| plies and carries with it the right to say
| what the mails shall be used for. This
OF course is the end OF the question, so
far as any attempt should be made to
treat the Wanamaker postal law as un-
constitutional. Notwithstanding the
| decision, opinion is yet left free, and ev-
cry one Is at liberty to publish his, on
any subject, even to the extent Of COM
menting with disapprobation upon the
judgment of that august tribunal of last
resort.
We fully appreciate the apparent pre-
sumption which may be imputed to any
one IN private life who ventures to de-
clare that the reasoning of the court is
unsound, according to his powers of IA
tiocination. Nevertheless, we dare to
say that in our very obscure and unin,-
portant opinion, there is one radical fal-
lacy in the reasoning of the Court.
1t is true that the Constitution confcrs
upon Congress the exclusive right to
establish post offices and post roads;
but it does not follow that it can arb-
trarily say what may and what shall
not pass over the roads and through the
offices.
Congress is but the creature of the
States, and it has never heretofore been
seriously denied that its powers are to
he strictly interpreted and construed.
The departure from this principle is in
every instance a step in the direction Of
usurpation and Capitalization. II the
States quietly submit to it the precedent
becomes a law, and one too which can
no longer be said 10 be limited by the
Constitution.
Two dangers necessarily flow from
this. First, States rights will be ire
trletabiy lost, and second, the WILL of |
the dominant political party will become
a substitute for the fundamental law
called the Constitution.
that which, under the colonial govern
ment, and thereafter under the confed-
Grafton, the States did for themselves. |
. careful study of the autonomy of the |
States during those periods will satisfy !
the mind that, before the adoption of .
the constitution, the States made their
own postal arrangements, and each for /
Itself. 1t the State of Louisiana now
had the esta blishment of its own post
coads and offices, is it reasonable to pre-
sume that it would charter company
and then refuse it the use of its mails J? |
The decision Of the Court, to our mind
upon the hypothesis Of the
separate existence of the Congress, free
rom any necessary Identification with
he States; whereas it is, in fact, but
he dlte, ego of them.
1t is but the agent Of the States, to do
or them and III their name that which,
)ut for the federation, they might do
or themselves.
1t the doctrine of the court lie consti-
utionally correct, and il the constitu-
ion be no longer the limit of authority
Under the doctrine of strict construc-
lon, what Is to prevent one dominant
political party from enacting laws for
bidding the use of the mails to another?
shall morality become the standard and
'arty expediency the limit or text of
uthority? No doubt each party con-
lders its antagonist unfaithful to the
purposes of the govern
nent, and holding this view as patriots
must follow that in its estimation the
Welfare of the people must necessarily
re the supreme law Of the land. We
epeat it that Congress is not separate
nifty, free to nullify the constitutional
lights OF the States.