128 HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. Ch.6. empire, and which had no restriction but the discre- tion of Congress." He held that the Constitution had been plainly and repeatedly violated ; " and in refer- ence to the precedent of 1804, the wisest statesmen protested against it, and the President more than doubted its policy and the power of the government." The Court, he said, could not undertake to conquer their scruples as the President and Congress had done. " They acknowledge that our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution, and they cannot make it blank paper by construction." This sneer at President Jefferson was almost the last official expression of strict-constructionist princi- ples. Of its propriety the Court itself was the best judge, but its historical interest could not be denied. If Justice Campbell and Chief-Justice Taney were right, according to the tenets of their school the legislation of 1803-1804 was plainly unconstitutional. In that case, by stronger reasoning the treaty itself was unconstitutional and void from the beginning; for not only did Jefferson's doubts to which Campbell alluded refer to the treaty and not to the legislation, but the treaty was at least equally responsible with the laws for making, in 1808, a situation which re- quired what Campbell denounced, — "the supreme and irresistible power which is now claimed for Con- gress over boundless territories, the use of which can- not fail to react upon the political system of the States to its subversion." With the law the story need not concern itself,
