New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1908-04-26
ZIP RAYNER'S W1RNING.

Senator Isidor Rayner has again climbed up
20 tho watch tower and warned the country
against '.scribes and mOuntebanks VINO woulu
tanner with the federal Constitution. DE
wants TO have the Constitution preserved IN ali
its original integrity. and heaps anathema Oh
the innovators who are 'paraphraslhS anu III
ternretfng it, 1t seems to be the idea of the
MARYLAND Senator that it is sacrileSe 10 reau
a meaning less than one hundred and twenty
roorS old into the Constitution. If want to
find ont its meaning says the distinguished
nronoser of the one hundred and twenty year
limit. Il will 90 to the men who framed IL L
will examine the pages of The Federailst.
We are afraid that Mr.. Rayner carries 10 an
imnracticable extreme this aversion 10 Tue
necessary and useful process OF CONSTITUTIONS.
construction He said In another section OF
his sneech in the Senate last Thursday that De-
sides the authors of The Federalist ne might
consent to consult Marshall ana lahey III 'h1
annIication of the Constitution to governmental
and legislative problems Ihls WAS pei n"p'
a slim of speech; for We cannot conceive now
s,,ch a stickler for the original integrity ana
inevnansiveness of the Constitution could per
nit himself TO approve OF the ruthless con
structions of that instrument INDUCED IN D!
latitudinarian like Marshall We have the au
thority of Thomas Jefferson, as Weii rs VI
Chief Justice Clark, Of the North Caroiliia ou
nreme Court for the statement that Marshall
grated on the Constitution the unauthorized
practice of multiplying in the supreme Court
laws passed by Congress and approved oy ine
Executive. jefferson denied Marshall lIsn'
70 declare a law void because unconstitutional.
Yet though Mr. Rayner venerates JEFFERSON anu
declares that the party which he founded has
ALWAYS been the sentinel OF the Constitution,
he illocicaIly confesses that he would tolerate
NarshaII's constitutional innovations and con-
done the work of the greatest federaIZer III
our history. .,
The trouble about the theory of constitutional
INTEGRITY and inviOabity which MI. ha!Hef
loves 10 PROFOUND is that it assumes that tlie
Constitution is dead and finished instrument
incapable of development to meet the ne" re-
ouirements of each new century. The constr
tuition is. on The contrary, an organism WHICH
has grown and fitted itself TO the nation
changing poIiticaI needs. Jurists and states
mon in each generation have not heSltated 10
consfr1le II and adapt it to the condltons OF
their time and that process OF constructor
must continue so long as social ana poilucai
progress continues. Only dead nation can
have a dead constitution.
The Democratic party under Jefferson. JACK
son and Calhoun did not hesitate to read INTO
the Constitution meanings which those ledueIS
1houpbt consistent with sound national policy.
lev and Roosevelt has not shrunk from advo-
eating constitutional constructions which
seemed essential to national development. 30
it will always be. The Constitution and the
nation will keep or growing, and old powers
will be found adaptable TO accomplish new ana
necessary national objects 1t is absurd LOT
.. strict consfructionfst TO claim the right OF
construction for himself and then deny IL 10
his fellow broad conStructionist. It is only
as the two constructions clash that the real
meaning of the Constitution IS aScertalh'd'
The Constitution made for the nation not
the nation for the Constitution. and the United
States to-day has questions To settle. under ltS
restrictions. never dreamed OF ny haihIi'oh'
Madison Mason. Wilson and the others who
drez- II aS = eralized charter for state
and federal cooperation As something OF
constructionist himself, Mr.. Rayner should not
be so hard on rival interpreters of the terms
OF our elastic national charter.