The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1896-09-06
THE ATTACK" ON THE SUPREME
COURT.

Il Al
COURT.
The opponents of Mr.. Bryan are
fond of declaring that they cannot
vote for him because the convention
that nominated him made AN attack
on the judiciary, which shows that
the Democrats are revolutionists." Ii
the Democratic party has wantonly
attacked the Supreme Court, as al
legged, those who make the charge
ought to be fair enough to give the
specifications. Tt will be observed that
they never do this, because an attempt
to prove the assertion would JUSTIFY
the wisdom of the Chicago convention,
and as most of the critics are trying
to dodge an income tax they carefully
refrain from going into particulars.
The plank referred to by the Indiana
polis boilers and other assistant Re-
publicans is:
There would be no deficit in the
revenue but for the annulment by
the Supreme Court of law passed
by a Democratic Congress in strict
pursuance of the uniform decisions
of that court for nearly one hun
bred years, that court having in
that decision sustained contsitu-
tional objections to it's enactment
which had previously been over
ruled by the judges who have ever
sat upon that bench. We declare
that it is the duty of Congress to
use all the constitutional power
which remains after that decision,
or which may come from its re-
versal by the court, as it may here
after be constituted, so that the
burdens oftaxation may be equal
~ and impartially laid, to the end
that wealth may bear its due pro-
portion of the expenses of the gov
eminent"
This declaration merely means that
the Democrats favor a constitutional
that will permit the levy
of an income tax, or, if the President
is called upon to fill a vacancy on the
bench he will name a lawyer who be-
lieves the Supreme Court has been
right for one hundred years instead
of being right now by the. slim, ma
jority of one, after a member of the
court had topped There is no
evasion about this declaration, and
it is rather defense of the attitude
Of the court during its existence than
an ''attack"
This is not the first time that a
political party has declared itself OPP
posed to a decision of a bare majority
of the Supreme Court. Hostility to
the bred Scott decision breathed
the breath of life into the Republican
party. In defence of his party, Mr..
Lincoln, in the great joint debate with
said:
judicial decisions have two uses.
First, to absolutely determine the
case decided, and. secondly, to in
dictate to the public how other
similar cases will be decided when
they arise. For the latter use
they are called 'precedents,' and
are of greater or less authority.
VI II biiC
bred Scott decision had been made
by the unanimous concurrence of
all the Judges, and without any
apparent partisan bias and in ac-
cordance with legal expectation
and the steady practice of the de-
partments throughout our history,
or if it had been before the court
more than once, and had been
course of years, it might then he
factious not to acquiesce in it as a
precedent. But when, as is true,
we find it wanting in all these
claims to the public confidence, it
is not factious, it is not even dis
respectful, to treat it as not having
yet quite established settled doc
trine for the country.
''This same court once decided
a National bank to be constitu-
tional, but General Jackson, as
President of the United States, dis
regarded the decision and vetoed
a bill for a re-charter of the bank
partly on constitutional grounds.
Again and again / have heard
Judge Douglass denounce that de-
cision and applaud General Jack
son for disregarding it. kt%
We believe the bred Scott decision
to be erroneous. We know that
the court that made it has often
oyerruled its own decisions, and
we shall do what we can to have
it overrule this"
Whatever Others may say, in the
light of Lincoln's words, no Republi-
can can criticize the Democratic plank
without denouncing his own party
and its greatest leader.
In his mastery defense of the plat
forms, replying to Hill, Villas and Rus
sell at the Chicago convention, Mr..
Bryan said:
''They criticise us for our criti-
cisms of the Supreme Court of the
United States. My friends, we
have not criticised. We have SIM
ply called attention to what you
know. If you want criticisms
read the dissenting opinions of the