Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol I).djvu/403

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

CH. IV.]

FINAL INTERPRETER.

363

istenceand value.^[1] So, that it is indisputable, that the constitution was adopted under a full knowledge of this exposition of its grant of power to the judicial department.^[2]

§ 391. This is not all. The constitution has now been in full operation more than forty years; and during this period the Supreme Court has constantly exercised this power of final interpretation in relation, not only to the constitution, and laws of the Union, but in relation to state acts and state constitutions and laws, so far as they affected the constitution, and laws, and treaties of the United States.^[3] Their decisions upon these grave questions have never been repudiated, or impaired by congress.^[4] No state has ever deliberately or forcibly resisted the execution of the judgments founded upon

↑ It would occupy too much space to quote the passages at large. Take for an instance, in the Virginia debates, Mr. Madison's remarks. "It may be a misfortune, that in organizing any government, the explication of its authority should be left to any of its co-ordinate branches. There is no example in any country, where it is otherwise. There is no new policy in submitting it to the judiciary of the United States." 2 Elliot's Debates, 390. See also Id. 380, 383, 395, 400, 404, 418. See also North Carolina Debates, 3 Elliot's Debates, 125, 127, 128, 130, 133, 134, 139, 141, 142, 143; Pennsylvania Debates, 3 Elliot's Debates, 280, 313. Mr. Luther Martin, in his letter to the Maryland Convention, said: "By the third article the judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court, &c. These courts, and these only, will have a right to decide upon the laws of the United States, and all questions arising upon their construction, &c. Whether, therefore, any laws, &c. of congress, or acts of its president, &c. are contrary to, or warranted by the constitution, rests only with the judges, who are appointed by congress to determine; by whose determinations every state is bound." 1 3 Elliot's Debates, 44, 45; Yates's Minutes, &c. See also The Federalist, No. 78.
↑ See Mr. Pinckney's Observations cited in Grimke's Speech in 1828, p. 86, 87.
↑ Dane's App. § 44, p 53, 54, 55; Grimke's Speech, 1828, p. 34 to 42.
↑ In the debates in the first congress organized under the constitution, the same doctrine was openly avowed, as indeed it has constantly been by the majority of congress at all subsequent periods. See 1 Lloyd's Debates, 219 to 590; 2 Lloyd's Debates, 284 to 327.

[1] It would occupy too much space to quote the passages at large. Take for an instance, in the Virginia debates, Mr. Madison's remarks. "It may be a misfortune, that in organizing any government, the explication of its authority should be left to any of its co-ordinate branches. There is no example in any country, where it is otherwise. There is no new policy in submitting it to the judiciary of the United States." 2 Elliot's Debates, 390. See also Id. 380, 383, 395, 400, 404, 418. See also North Carolina Debates, 3 Elliot's Debates, 125, 127, 128, 130, 133, 134, 139, 141, 142, 143; Pennsylvania Debates, 3 Elliot's Debates, 280, 313. Mr. Luther Martin, in his letter to the Maryland Convention, said: "By the third article the judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court, &c. These courts, and these only, will have a right to decide upon the laws of the United States, and all questions arising upon their construction, &c. Whether, therefore, any laws, &c. of congress, or acts of its president, &c. are contrary to, or warranted by the constitution, rests only with the judges, who are appointed by congress to determine; by whose determinations every state is bound." 1 3 Elliot's Debates, 44, 45; Yates's Minutes, &c. See also The Federalist, No. 78.

[2] See Mr. Pinckney's Observations cited in Grimke's Speech in 1828, p. 86, 87.

[3] Dane's App. § 44, p 53, 54, 55; Grimke's Speech, 1828, p. 34 to 42.

[4] In the debates in the first congress organized under the constitution, the same doctrine was openly avowed, as indeed it has constantly been by the majority of congress at all subsequent periods. See 1 Lloyd's Debates, 219 to 590; 2 Lloyd's Debates, 284 to 327.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]