Year: 1877

the majority of the Supreme Court, to
see how true this is. They applied the
broadest or the narrOwest rules of in
depreciation, adhered to the letter or
pretended to seek the spirit, as occa-
sion required, in order to give judicial
to all the outrages ON honesty,
property and liberty perpetrated by the
the officials aud the Legisla-
ture they were appointed to serve.
They defeated all the substantial pur-
poses for which Constitutions are made
at all.


1t would be a work of considerable
labor to recall and rehearse one by one
all the instances in which popular and
individual rights were subverted under
the late regime by means of the INSULT
cheney and unrighteousness of the ex-
isting constitution. We viii, therefore,
content ourselves with only such refer
ences as may be useful while we at
tempt to show what evils should be re-
moved, and what benefits should be
secured by new constitution.


First in order, ,and Of essential impor-
tance in itself and in general, is the
t0oarEi1g-the choice of terms and
phraseology. The form of words in
which any dogmatic or legislative mat
ter is exPlessell-the form in which
the parts of a constitutional charter are
put together with the design of making
it a consistent and harmonious whole
certainly be Of primary advan-
tage; for on this, of course, depends
the efficacy of the body and members
OF the system conceived. The greatest
care, attention and skill should be ap-
piled to the logical construction of such
a document, for it is the most serious
of all temporal instruments-iti is the
basis on which all legislation must rest
it builds the fabric of the State-it is
or should be the guarantee of the safety
of the few against the tyranny of the
many-the last citadel OF individual
rights-the refuge of the weak-the
palladium of liberty; but if it be loose
sary to make its meaning precise and
certain is omitted-be assured the de-
feet will be taken advantage of to serve
the passions or interests of those who
are in power. The Interpretation will
be one way or the other,as it may hap
pen to suit them. ssHold to the form
of sound words which thou hast heard
of me in faith,'' said st. Paul to Timo-
thy and hence the Church has, in the
spiritual order, been extremely careful
in the phraseology of its teaching. So
should it be in the temporal order, and
this more particularly in the wording
of the organic law of the State than in
any other writing. TO the neglect of
this requirement can be traced the pos
sibility of almost every perversc and
servile Interpretation that the judiciary
or the legislature has been guilty of.
Hayes is now lie tucto President in con-
sequence Of there being no express
phrase in the Federal Constitution to
say who shall count the electoral vote
and then when it was thought that the
Act Of Congress creating the Electoral
and had provided for ascertsining ichO
ho,1 been elected President, another cum
ming neglect to express this purpose in
due form of words, enabled Joe Brad
ley to decide that he was commission
ed not to ascertain who was elected but
only what credentials were technically
formal and that no authority or juris-
diction had been conferred on him to
enquire whether or not the credentials
were fraudulent and false. Many sim
liar, though less momentous instances
of the necessity of Il form of sound


words have occurred. For example,
there are the decisions of Lutleling and


his associates recognizing the omnipo-
tence of the Returning Board; the abol-


ition of inconvenient courts and judges;
the legality Of the bonds issued to his
Shreveport and Vicksburg Railroad,
etc. These decisions would not have


been possible if the instrument had


been carefully worded, and the fra


mers had done their work in view OF


the danger of leaving a loophole for a
dishonorable party or judiciary to get


through.


This is all we need say, ut present,


on this first essential requisite of Il con-
stitution. In considering the other


requisites, the correctness Of the above


remarks will be more and more appa-


rent. We therefore pass on and ask


ourselves the question "Why are con-


stitutions made o'' Certainly not to


say that tho majority shall be omnipo-


tent. If that were the sole object, min


critics and individuals would soon be


deprived Of property and liberty to
glut the avarice aud crafty the malice