it is against what must have been the intention of the framers.
This is a very unsafe rule of construction. As has been said, the
Constitution necessarily deals in general principles; these
principles are to be carried out to their legitimate conclusion
and result by legislation, and we are to judge of the intention
of those who established the Constitution by what they say,
guided by what they declare on the face of the instrument to be
their object.
It is said by Judge Story, in Story on the Constitution:
Contemporary construction is properly resorted to to
illustrate and confirm the text.... It can never abrogate
the text; it can never fritter away its obvious sense; it
can never narrow down its true limitations.
It is a well-settled rule that in the construction of the
Constitution, the objects for which it was established, being
expressed in the instrument, should have great influence; and
when words and phrases are used which are capable of different
constructions, that construction should be given which is the
most consonant with the declared objects of the instrument. We go
to the preamble to ascertain the objects and purpose of the
instrument. Webster defines preamble thus: "The introductory part
of a statute, which states the reason and intent of the law." In
the preamble, then, more certainly than in any other way, aside
from the language of the instrument, we find the intent. Judge
Story says:
The importance of examining the preamble for the purpose of
expounding the language of a statute has been long felt and
universally conceded in all juridical discussion. It is an
admitted maxim ... that the preamble is a key to open the
mind of the matters as to the mischiefs to be remedied and
the objects to be accomplished by the statute.... It is
properly resorted to where doubts or ambiguities arise upon
the words of the enacting part, for if they are clear and
unambiguous, there seems little room for interpretation,
except in cases leading to an obvious absurdity or a direct
overthrow of the intention expressed in the preamble. [Story
on the Constitution, sec. 457.]
Try this question by a consideration of the objects for which the
Constit
|