THE American people have shown no hesitancy in criticising two of the branches of the general government, the executive and the legislative. Congress is made a target for slings and arrows and sharp shafts of ridicule and unmodified invective. And even political conventions in their platforms "denounce" the executive in the most unsparing terms. But there has always been some question in regard to criticism of the Supreme Court. As early as Jefferson's day the question was raised as to how sacred this branch of the government should be considered. The great author of the Declaration of Independence disposed of it by the rather tart remark that "Judges are as honest as other men, not more so," and Lincoln quotes him as substantially saying, "that whenever a free people shall give up in absolute submission to any department of their government their liberties are gone."
President Jackson wrestled with the question during the struggle over the United States Bank, and showed a very marked disposition not to consider the third branch of the government absolutely infallible.
But the most intense agitation of the question occurred after the Dred Scott decision. To say that a vast number of people did not believe that decision correct or righteous, or that it ought to stand, would be putting it very mildly. "That decision," said Mr. Lincoln, in his memorable debate with Douglas at Galesburg, "declares that the right of property in a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed in the Constitution. I believe that the right of property in a slave is not distinctly and expressly affirmed in the Constitution." Here then was the after-emancipator setting his opinion squarely against the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States. Perhaps Douglas exaggerated a
little when he said, "My opponent is going to appeal from the Supreme Court of the United States to every town meeting," but certainly the appeal of Lincoln and his party was from the Supreme Court to the conscience of the north and to the "higher law." The debate between the two political giants turned largely on this very question of absolute submission to the decisions of the Supreme Court. The famous question which Lincoln put to the astute and wily senator at Freeport, the question which it has been said saved Douglas in the senatorial race but defeated him at the Charleston convention two years later, was as follows: "If the Supreme Court of the United States shall decide that states can not exclude slavery from their limits, are you in favor of acquiescing in, adopting and following, such decision as a rule of political action?" It was Lincoln's contention that the Supreme Court was getting ready to make such a decision and that Douglas dare not tell an Illinois audience that he would acquiesce in it. But to sum it all up, the election of Lincoln to the Presidency two years later was largely due to the feeling aroused by the decision of the Supreme Court.
Another decision which caused much criticism was that in which Chief Justice Chase pronounced against his own greenbacks. The sentiment against this decision was so strong that when President Grant appointed a justice to fill a vacancy the judgment of the court was reversed. The opinion was freely expressed at the time that this appointment was made with this end in view, but such a view of the matter has been considered rather severe.
The history of the country shows, therefore, that while there has been considerable reserve in the expression of opinion concerning the action of the supreme judicial body of the land, yet its judgments have not been regarded as above question, and have been tested at the bar of the public conscience. Where they have failed to satisfy the sentiment of the nation they have sooner or later suffered reversal.—The Advance.
