按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
when they are defending that central administration which was one of the great innovations of the Revolution？ *v In this manner popularity may be conciliated with hostility to the rights of the people； and the secret slave of tyranny may be the professed admirer of freedom。
＇Footnote v： See Appendix K。＇
I have visited the two nations in which the system of provincial liberty has been most perfectly established； and I have listened to the opinions of different parties in those countries。 In America I met with men who secretly aspired to destroy the democratic institutions of the Union； in England I found others who attacked the aristocracy openly； but I know of no one who does not regard provincial independence as a great benefit。 In both countries I have heard a thousand different causes assigned for the evils of the State； but the local system was never mentioned amongst them。 I have heard citizens attribute the power and prosperity of their country to a multitude of reasons； but they all placed the advantages of local institutions in the foremost rank。 Am I to suppose that when men who are naturally so divided on religious opinions and on political theories agree on one point （and that one of which they have daily experience）； they are all in error？ The only nations which deny the utility of provincial liberties are those which have fewest of them； in other words； those who are unacquainted with the institution are the only persons who pass a censure upon it。
Chapter VI： Judicial Power In The United States
Chapter Summary
The Anglo…Americans have retained the characteristics of judicial power which are common to all nations … They have； however； made it a powerful political organ … How … In what the judicial system of the Anglo…Americans differs from that of all other nations … Why the American judges have the right of declaring the laws to be unconstitutional … How they use this right …Precautions taken by the legislator to prevent its abuse。
Judicial Power In The United States And Its Influence On Political Society
I have thought it essential to devote a separate chapter to the judicial authorities of the United States； lest their great political importance should be lessened in the reader's eyes by a merely incidental mention of them。 Confederations have existed in other countries beside America； and republics have not been established upon the shores of the New World alone； the representative system of government has been adopted in several States of Europe； but I am not aware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized a judicial power on the principle now adopted by the Americans。 The judicial organization of the United States is the institution which a stranger has the greatest difficulty in understanding。 He hears the authority of a judge invoked in the political occurrences of every day； and he naturally concludes that in the United States the judges are important political functionaries； nevertheless； when he examines the nature of the tribunals； they offer nothing which is contrary to the usual habits and privileges of those bodies； and the magistrates seem to him to interfere in public affairs of chance； but by a chance which recurs every day。
When the Parliament of Paris remonstrated； or refused to enregister an edict； or when it summoned a functionary accused of malversation to its bar； its political influence as a judicial body was clearly visible； but nothing of the kind is to be seen in the United States。 The Americans have retained all the ordinary characteristics of judicial authority； and have carefully restricted its action to the ordinary circle of its functions。 The first characteristic of judicial power in all nations is the duty of arbitration。 But rights must be contested in order to warrant the interference of a tribunal； and an action must be brought to obtain the decision of a judge。 As long； therefore； as the law is uncontested； the judicial authority is not called upon to discuss it； and it may exist without being perceived。 When a judge in a given case attacks a law relating to that case； he extends the circle of his customary duties； without however stepping beyond it； since he is in some measure obliged to decide upon the law in order to decide the case。 But if he pronounces upon a law without resting upon a case； he clearly steps beyond his sphere； and invades that of the legislative authority。
The second characteristic of judicial power is that it pronounces on special cases； and not upon general principles。 If a judge in deciding a particular point destroys a general principle； by passing a judgment which tends to reject all the inferences from that principle； and consequently to annul it； he remains within the ordinary limits of his functions。 But if he directly attacks a general principle without having a particular case in view； he leaves the circle in which all nations have agreed to confine his authority； he assumes a more important； and perhaps a more useful； influence than that of the magistrate； but he ceases to be a representative of the judicial power。
The third characteristic of the judicial power is its inability to act unless it is appealed to； or until it has taken cognizance of an affair。 This characteristic is less general than the other two； but； notwithstanding the exceptions； I think it may be regarded as essential。 The judicial power is by its nature devoid of action； it must be put in motion in order to produce a result。 When it is called upon to repress a crime； it punishes the criminal； when a wrong is to be redressed； it is ready to redress it； when an act requires interpretation； it is prepared to interpret it； but it does not pursue criminals； hunt out wrongs； or examine into evidence of its own accord。 A judicial functionary who should open proceedings； and usurp the censorship of the laws； would in some measure do violence to the passive nature of his authority。
The Americans have retained these three distinguishing characteristics of the judicial power； an American judge can only pronounce a decision when litigation has arisen； he is only conversant with special cases； and he cannot act until the cause has been duly brought before the court。 His position is therefore perfectly similar to that of the magistrate of other nations； and he is nevertheless invested with immense political power。 If the sphere of his authority and his means of action are the same as those of other judges； it may be asked whence he derives a power which they do not possess。 The cause of this difference lies in the simple fact that the Americans have acknowledged the right of the judges to found their decisions on the constitution rather than on the laws。 In other words； they have left them at liberty not to apply such laws as may appear to them to be unconstitutional。
I am aware that a similar right has been claimed … but claimed in vain …by courts of justice in other countries； but in America it is recognized by all authorities； and not a party； nor so much as an individual； is found to contest it。 This fact can only be explained by the principles of the American constitution。 In France the constitution is （or at least