ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

carried into execution, which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it, in the manner most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional." (4 Wheaton, 415-421.)

We submit that upon the principles settled by this decision, the laws in question are plainly within the powers expressly vested in Congress by the Constitution. If the question were even one of doubt-one on which, in the language of Chief Justice MARSHALL, "human reason might pause, and the human judgment be suspended" you would not on such an issue, bring the judiciary in collision with the other two departments of the government, but would solve the question, by giving your country the benefit of the doubt. Even in such a case, the Court would peremptorily refuse, in the language of Mr. Justice GRIER, " to cripple the arm of the Government, and paralyze its powers by subtle definitions and ingenious sophisms. (2 American Law Register, N. S. 339.)

The question is, not how three members of the convention which framed the Constitution were induced to propose it to the people-but what was the intent evinced by the people in its adoption? The inquiry is, how would it have been read by Washington, Hamilton, and Madison, in the light of the events now transpiring-which have developed the necessity and wisdom of these general grants of power. As George Mason said to John C. Calhoun, "the Constitution has proved to be wiser than the men who made it.”

President Madison, in his annual message, of December 5, 1815, after the close of the war with Great Britain, introduced a passage which leaves no doubt how he would have solved the question, in a national exigency like that in which these laws were passed.

"The absence of the precious metals will, it is believed, be a temporary evil; but until they can again be rendered the general medium of exchange, it devolves on the wisdom of Congress to provide a substitute which shall equally engage the confidence and accommodate the wants of the citizens throughout the Union. If the operation of the State banks cannot pro

duce this result, the probable operation of a national bank will merit consideration; and, if neither of these expedients be deemed effectual, it may be necessary to ascertain the terms upon which the notes of the government, no longer required as an instrument of credit, shall be issued upon motives of general policy as a common medium of circulation." (1 Statesman's Manual, 330.)

It is to be remembered, too, that this is not an issue between the States and the nation,-between two clashing sovereignties; but simply a question whether the power we contend for has been annihilated, or whether it exists in the Federal Government for the common protection of the people and the States. We submit that, in determining this issue, the Constitution is to be read as an ordinance of sovereignty, by the people of a continent, for the maintenance of public law and liberty, and the defence of themselves and their posterity. It is also to be remembered that the paramount duty of every citizen, every officer, every judge, State and Federal, is to uphold the Government and defend the Constitution. Especially is this our duty when the issue presented is, whether the Constitution, adopted by the people for their protection, shall be so wrested from its objects as to enure only to the benefit of the public enemy. It happens, by a singular coincidence, that the appeal to your Honors to declare the Government impotent for its own defence, is made at a time, when the heels of the rebel soldiery are polluting the soil of a free State, between the capitol of New York in which we hold our deliberations, and the capitol of the nation where final judgment is to be pronounced.

On the theory we maintain, the Constitution was designed as a citadel to secure public liberty and repose. On the theory of our adversaries, it was to serve as a grave, in which sovereignty should be buried alive, to linger only until life should be extinguished by suffocation.

66

E pluribus unum," is not a mere rhetorical phrase, but the terse record of the philosophy of our system of Governmenta stumbling block only to those who reject even the mathematical postulate, that the whole is greater than either of its parts. The effect of yielding to the views of these tenacious friends of the Constitution, would be to relieve them and us from its

burdens and its protection. It would be to deliver over the Government to its enemies, "monstrum ingens-cui lumen ademptum"-nay more, with its inherent force, and its Constitutional power of self-defence, bound to helplessness with cords spun from its own fibre.

ARGUMENT

OF

GEORGE T. CURTIS, Esq.,

Closing for Appellant.

MR. CURTIS said:

In order that I may not trespass upon the time that ought to be given to gentlemen upon the other side of this question, I shall say but very few words in closing this case. more especially, because very few words are required.

And the

I have listened with great attention, and with great care, to both the counsel on the other side. And I am sure it cannot be expected of me-in a grave proceeding in a court, which necessarily sits between two sovereignties, to adjudge what are the rights and duties of its own citizens in respect to those two sovereignties, towards each of which they bear relations of allegiance-it cannot be expected of me that I should reply to a very large portion of the remarks which have been submitted to your Honors on the other side; and which, I mean to say it without the slightest possible disrespect to the gentlemen, have as it seems to me tended to afford.no aid whatsoever to the Court in the discharge of their duties.

In relation, however, in the first place to what fell from MR. TREMAIN, there is a point or two which it is proper I should notice, in order to place the issue on its true ground. I understand, and repeat, that the distinction which has always been recognized, and was more especially recognised in the forma tion of the Constitution of the United States, between the is

suing of such paper as has been commonly called treasury notes-that is, evidences of debt, when issued by either Government, the State or the National, or issued in forms transferable to bearer, from hand to hand, there has never been any question upon it. Such paper never has been prohibited to the States, and it always has been assumed that it is within the power of the United States, within the power to borrow money. But that which is denominated a bill of credit, viz., a promissory note, issued on the credit and faith of the Government, and intended to pass into circulation as money, and to have the attributes of money, and to be under the Legislative authority of the Government clothed with the attributes of tender in the discharge of contracts, was a thing which was prohibited to the States, and was not granted to the United States, for a reason, and a purpose, and that reason and that purpose, I think I

have shown.

Now, in respect to a great deal that has been said in regard to the necessity under which this law was passed, and the whole array of facts, circumstances, and political history—a portion of which may be true, and a portion of which everybody knows is attended at best with a great deal of fable—it is all a matter of opinion, going to maintain an alleged case of necessity. Yet, you must come down-because you are a judiciary sitting to adjudge a question of constitutional law-you must come down to the rule of the Constitution, and exercise a judicial judg ment upon the constitutional relation between the measure itself and the power under which it is claimed. And it is in reference to that, that I deny entirely any power of legislation on the subject of that which is to discharge the obligation of a contract, or affect that obligation, as being within the powers of Congress.

As respects a large part of the observations which have fallen from both of the counsel on the other side, with regard to that doctrine of which so much use has been made, and from which, as if it were a substantive source of power, there spring these constant efforts to maintain the existence of specific powers on the part of the National Government which nobody ever heard of before, arising out of a state of war, and more especially in reference to their bearing on the rights, the vested and acknowl

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »