Our Changing Constitution by Charles Wheeler Pierson
page 64 of 147 (43%)
page 64 of 147 (43%)
|
in the Court, were now decided contrary to Marshall's known views and in
favor of a strict construction of national powers. Justice Story, Marshall's longtime associate on the bench, dissented strongly in both cases, lamenting the loss of Marshall's leadership and the change in the viewpoint of the Court. [Footnote 1: _Mayor of New York v. Miln_, 11 Peters, 102; _Briscoe v. Bank of Kentucky_, 11 Peters, 257, decided in 1837.] It would serve no useful purpose to enter upon a detailed consideration of the various decisions upon constitutional questions made during the twenty-eight years of Taney's Chief Justiceship. They were marked by great diversity of views among the members of the Court. In some of them, notably the famous Passenger cases,[1] the Court fell into a state reminiscent of the confusion of tongues that arose at the building of the Tower of Babel. The scope of certain of Marshall's decisions was limited.[2] Upon the whole, however, the structure of constitutional law which Marshall had reared was not torn down or greatly impaired. The national supremacy was upheld. Taney and his associates were for the most part patriotic men and eminent lawyers, proud of the Court and its history and anxious to add to its prestige. It is regrettable that the merits of some of them have been so obscured and their memory so clouded by a well-meaning but unfortunate excursion into the field of political passions. In the Dred Scott case[3] they thought to quiet agitation and contribute to the peace of their country by passing judgment upon certain angrily mooted questions of a political character. The effort was a failure and brought upon their heads, and upon Chief Justice Taney in particular, an avalanche of misrepresentation and obloquy. [Footnote 1: 7 Howard, 283 (1849).] |
|