Philada., Feb. 8, 1860.
. . . The safer principle to adopt in regard to the Dred
Scott case, I think, is, that when the Constitution has been interpreted on a
contested point, by the Supreme Court, and that interpretation practically
followed for more than half a century, no contrary decision by the same court
can have the least authority whatever. This is the specific rule that I would
apply.
There is no Constitution without it. If the Dred Scott case
is followed, we have no unchanging Constitution whatever. It will be “alia
lex Romœ, alia
Athenis, alia nunc, alia posthac.”
Cicero had no notion of such a law.
They talk of overruling the former decisions and
practice. Whoever heard of such a thing being done by the same tribunal? How
can it overrule its own body, confirmed by the decisions of Presidents over and
over again, and by the laws of the Representatives of the people? The judges
have done an awful thing, as I have already told you; and my word for it, it
will not stand one moment if this government stands. You know how the
Amphictyonic Council fell when it went into politics and decided corruptly
between Sparta and Thebes. So it will be here, unless the Dred Scott case is brushed
away. . . .
SOURCE: Charles Chauncey Binney, The Life of Horace Binney: With Selections from His Letters, p.
296-7
No comments:
Post a Comment