The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-12-31
THE SUPREME COURT AND THE
 FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.

In his recent address, or which we have had somewhat to say. Justice Harlan declared that if there are any who think that the Federal constitu- tion has lost it's usefulness and force they are very much mistaken. "The American people," he said "are more determined that at any time in their history to maintain both National and State rights as those rights exist un- der the union ordained by the consti- tuition. They will not patiently con- slider any suggestion or device that looks to a union upon any other basis. They will maintain, at whatever cost and in all their integrity, both Nation al and State rights"
 1t is somewhat significant. and at the same time encouraging, that the Supreme Court has in the main, been the upholder and defender of the con stitution from the time of John Mar shall, one of the greatest jurists the country has ever known. He might be called the guardian of the constitu- ton for prior to his day there had not been any such definite and precise con- struction of it as fixed by him. Mems ideas of it were loose. and even some of the best lawyers differed widely as to it's real meaning and binding force, and some of the opinions entertained fO lovers of constitutional liberty and good government. Says Tho Boston Globe
 It is remarkable that since John Mar shall left the Supreme Court in 1885 the decisions of that body regarding the meaning of the constitution have been based largely on the principles first laid down by him. This is a great tribute to his abilities, because when made Chief Justice by President Adams in 1891 he had never filled any judicial station, although he was recognized as an able lawyer. In the beginning task of reaching conclusions in mat ters wherein books and authorities could give him little aid and of being required to solve questions in respect to which there were no precedents either in theory or practice
 r Marshall was the pioneer in constru- ing the meaning Of tbe provisions or the constitution, yet the Supreme Court today, according to Justice Harlan's views, occupies a position on constitu- tional questions similar to that first taken by Marshall. The court now has the great advantage of numerous pre- cedents to guide it, whereas in the ear ly days of the last century Marshall was obliged to create precedents for his successors.
 Then as now there were forces at 4.kF 1. fK1rr al spirit of the constitution, but Mar shall allowed nothing to interfere with a common sense interpretation of con stitutional law. Justice Harlan and his assocaites are following his exam pie to the Best of their abilities.
 Since MarshalPs day there have been members Of our highest court who have lacked very much. to say the least, of measuring up to his standard of ability, honesty and patriotism, There have been judges who lacked ability; there have been some who were strictly partisan, and perhaps there have been some who were put on the bench to accomplish specific purpose All this may be true, yet in the man the Supreme Court has stood Loyalty by the constitution and has more than once stood between the people and those who would have usurped to themselves powers which the framers of the government and the constitution never intended. To quote again from The Globe:
 When Justice Harlan advocates hold ing fast to the broad. liberal and safe rules of constitutional construction he opinion that there should be neither a liberal nor a strict construction, but that the simple, natural and usual of the constitution should govern their Interpretation
 Justice Marshall took the position that the language of the constitution could not be stretched in any direction to suit the whims of politicians. but that as jurist he must ind out what it meant and render decision accord ingly. He strove to be impartial and his decisions have been regarded gen. erally as wise and fortunate for the nation.
 The present Supreme Court by emu lating the example of Justice Marshall when constitutional questions arise is therefore continuing a policy which has helped make the United States d strong nation. New conditions are constantly arising in politics, finance and trade. but the constitution Is adequate to meet them without injuring the rights Of any State or individual.