{"character_count": 4909, "word_count": 852, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9645000100135803], "ccnet_perplexity": [923.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



stitution and State Government, imposet
on this house the duty Of constituting Law
in this more than any other case. 1t nigh
be considered rather an objection TO it
inasmuch as, in doing so, they woui'
have to expound the law themselves ha'
made-no principle being better estab


lished than that the authority which form


the law should not construe nor apply II


The true question in this case then, was


Mr.. l.. said, which was the best tribuna


TO decide the question respecting this dis


puted clause Of the Missouri constitution


If it were asked whether this house, or tn


Senate, or the Judiciary OF the country


were the best qualified 10 expound a law


there would be no difference OF opinioi


ou the question. It must, then, be con


sideration Of paramount duty only, OF


the part of this house to decide upon il


which could induce it TO undertake tnt


exposition of a law iu respect TO the con
struction of which there was doubt.


Mr.. L. then examined, somewhat al
large, the question, whether Judicial OF
legislative tribunal be the most capable 10
decide correctly such question as was
supposed to be presented by the particular
clause in the constitution Of Missouri. He
argued, from the inability of either branch
of Congress TO act independently on auy
such question, from their inability to act
with uniformity, &c. that they were not
the proper bodies to be charged with ju-
dicial Investigations. And why, he asked,
the rights Of all the states being equal,
should those Of Missouri be subject to an
adjudication different from that to which
other states are subject? The rights Of the
old states, he said, we're subject to Judicial
decision; and no man would pretend that,
in respect to any old state, Delaware for
example, her constitution could be sus-
pended, that her Senators aud Repre-
sentatives should be excluded from these
balls, on Congress thinking they had dis
covered something not altogether right in
her constitution. 1t was an essential OBJ
lection to the power now claimed for
Congress, that, if allowed, it would be a
power to be exercised in new state,
which none would pretend il could exer-
else in an old one. Upon every conside-
ration, of which he urged several others,
he was in favor Of leaving the matter with
the judiciary, where, and where only, in
bis opinion, it properly belonged.


The principles which had influenced,
from time to time, the conduct of the
different branches Of the government,
would. he said. lead to the same conclu-
sion. At the time of the formation Of the
federal constitution, Ito go back to that
date, it was foreseen that there might be
a disposition at some future day, in some
or other Of the states, to break over the
barriers of the constitution about TO be
formed, &c. and a provision was intro
duced prescribing mode Of deciding con-
of that description. Ii, in all
other cases Of constitutional questions. il
has been provided that they shall be de-
cided by the judiciary, the reason must
apply and be conclusive why this body
should not undertake to decide constitu-
tional question in the case of Missouri.
Justice requires that those who have the
same rights shall have their rights decided
by the same tribunal.


If, however, the only objection to the
passage Of the resolution now under con-
sideration was, that an inference might be
drawn, from the silence Of Congress, that
they approved the exceptionable proyis-
ion 10 the constitution Of Missouri, Mr.. L..
suggested that some mode might be adopt
ed by which the objection on this point
might be explained. He should himself,
as an individual, with the utmost reluc-
taDce express any opinion on the subject,
and he thought it wonld be exceedingly
unwise 10 Congress 10 do so. There would
be no end TO such course. There were
in the constitution Of Missouri, and of ey-
cry state in the Union. clauses TO which
some might take exception, of which Mr.
L. instanced the provisions respecting
banks, &c. which some believed the states
had no right to establish. Every consid-
Grafton Of prudence and propriety, 10 bis
opinion, forbade Congress from interpos
ing 10 tie present instance.


Mr.. L. said he did admit, however, that
there might be cases in which Congress
might find il 10 be their duty TO interpose,
on the moment of admission OF new states
into the Union. For instance, if, in re-
Iation to the term Of Senators, or any
other provision which, from its character,
could not be brought before the Supreme
Court, the new constitution we're incom.
patible with that of the United States, it
was his opinion it would be good reason
why Congress should interfere. Nor did
be thick this was at all inconsistent with
the ground he had already taken, if for
no other reason than that the Judicial iri-
bunal could decide the question now agi-
tated, and decide il better than this house.
The duty Of Congress, 10 this respect, be-


r.