Year: 1867

them. To argue that this ought not to be


so, Is idle; you might as well argue that hu-


man nature ought to be changed. Perhaps


II ought, but governments are made for men
as they are and not as they ought to be- aud


the wiz Of man is not equal to the task of
devising a written constitution which shall
4 be obeyed under all circumstances. Moth
ing would secure this result but some occult
power that would cause anybody who viola
ted it instantly 10 drop down dead. In two
thirds OF what Is written on the sancity Of
fundamental law, including the long dis
QUESTIONS OF Mr. u. T. Curtis in the World.
there is false bottom to the thinking
The reasoning is based on the assumption
that the Constitution is the ultimate fact OF
our system of government This is delu-
sion. The ultimate fact Of this as Of all
Governments, is human nature; and until
human nature is totally changed, the major
/ ity Of great and free country win not al
low one man calling himself an executive,
or nine men calling themselves a court, to


interpret the fundamental law when, in the
opinion of the majority, their interpreta-
/ ton would be dangerous to the public


safety.


But this, says Freedom means a gov
ernment of mere majority, and leaves my


breath dependent on their will He is
right, This is exactly what it means. We
do live under a Government Of the MAORI
ty. The Constitution Is an instrument by


which the majority binds itself to refrain
from certain acts, but it never gives up its
right, IN the last resort, of explaining the
sense in which 1t took the pledge, or, In
other words of taking the President or any
body else whom it finds running about and


doing mischief, while protesting to take


'the Constitution Tor his guide, and put


ting him under lock and key, if it believes
his hermeueutics dangerous to the State.


The idea that there Is something very hOr


rible Ia being dependent on the majority Of a


Christian State for liberty and security,


which Freedom seems to entertain, is the


product Of that species Of fetish worship of
which the Constitution has long been the


object The Constitution, unless it be a


talisman, cannot have any more force than


the majority gives it. If the majority de-
siyes to rob and cut throats, there is no yir


tue in the parchment to stop it. If it al
lows Andrew johnson and the Supreme


Court to define their own powers, it is sim
ply because it does not consider it worth


while TO interfere with them.


This fact has always been so well under


stood by the highest class of minds, that in
constitutional countries the skill of great
statesmen has nearly always been shown in
avoiding reliance on the constitution in per
sGl1ing the majority into doing or not doing
certain things without falling back on naked
legal rights, As soon as q King, President,
or Minister says, in exciting times. that he
will fail back on the constitution or charter,


and act on his own construction Of 1t, he


shows himself as much q fool and is as sure
to be destroyed, as a single man who should


noint his rifle at a regiment. The end and


use of statemanship is to avoid bringing


things to this pass. The minute the states


man appeals to force against the majority,


the majority measures its own strength


against him, and sweeps him aside.


This is Just what Andrew johnson seems
disposed to do. He says his Interpretation


Of the Constitution is the right one Con


gress says its Interpretation is the right one.


Admitting one to be as likely to be right as


the other, who Is to decide between them
The Supreme Court is simply, when the


destiny Of nation Is at stake, nine elderly


men. Suppose they throw themselves on
Mr. Johnson's 5 side, the result would be


that ten elderly men would be OF his way


of thinking instead Of one, because Con


gress does not regard the Court as any more
competent intellectually to decide such
questions as are raised in the reconstruction
problem than Congress Is itself. If the
Court we're more competent than Congress


to decide such questions, it ought to govern
the country completely, and the election and
| meeting of the Legislature Is = Uesiess ex-
| pense. so that in the last resort the dispute
| can only be ended by the majority using It's
! superiority of force to decide-and this it is


sure to DO. This may be an unfortunate


state of things, but nobody is to blame for
/ it-neither the trainers of the Constitution,


nor those who live under it. In every free
4 State the maintenance Of liberty and JUS
/ tice-uo matter what the written forms may
/ be-depcuds in the last resort on the char


acter Of the majority eff the people. Free
dom would be sure Of his liberty in Phila-
| delphia if the Constitution were abolished
1 tomorrow; he would not be sure of his head


or his purse if he lived in Mexico, though
/ every man in the country wore the Constl-
tuition in a lockct around his neck as an am
{ Met -Ne5r l1rB. Nation