Alexandria advertiser and commercial intelligencer. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1800-1803, 1802-03-11

the mott valuable inheritance 20 their
children. Let me. fay, thar this fame
comm IN Law, now 20 much delpiied and
yiliied, is the cradle Of the rights and II
t,erties which we now enjoy. It IS 20 Tue
common law we owe our diainetion rom
the coloniits Of France, Of Portugal and OF
spain. How long is it fnce we have Gil
covered the malignant qualities which are
now afcri>ed to this law! Is there tate
in the Union which has not adopted IT.
and which it is not in force? Why, IS It
refuled TO the federal contribution! Up
on the fame principle, that every power.
is denied which tends to invigorate the
government. Without this law, ihe
contribution becomes, what perhaps ma
ny gentlemen win to fee il, a dead let
ter.
For ten years it has been che doctrines
of our courts, that the common law was
in force, and yet can gentlemen lay,
that there has been a victim who has tuf-
tered under it. Many have experiences
its protection, none can complain OF Its
opprehion,
In order to demonerate the afpiring
ambition of this hody polite, the Judiciary
the hon. gentlemen itated with much en-,
phais and feeling, that the Judges ia
been hardy enough to feud their mandate
into the executive cabinet. Was the gen
tieman, fir, acquainted with the fact when
hr made this ftatement. 1t differs eilen.
TALLY from what | know Ishave hearu
upon the fubjeet. | lhall be allowed 70
fate the fast. "
Several commflions had been made out
ny the late adminiti ration, tor juItices
ofthe peace of this territory The com
millions we're complere-they were tignea
and lealed, and lett with the clerks ot,he
Office of itate, to be handed to the pefhns
appointed. The new administration totno
them on the clerks table, and though
proper to withhold them. 1hefe officers
are not dependent on the will OF the m-
Gdent. The perfons named in the CON.
uiaions, conGdered that their appoint
M nts were complete, and thar the detd,-
ton Of their commi,lions was wrong and
not juaided by the legitimate authority
of the executive. They applied to tie
fupreme court, for rule upon the fecr-
,ary of tate, to thew csuie why mand-
mus lhouli not iiIue, commanding him 70
deliver up the commiGons.' Let me ak,
fir, what could the judgesdos The NE
to thew caufe was matter of coune, upon
new point in the leaf doubtful. To
have denied it, would have been to hut
the doors of juitice againIf the parties.
1t concludes nothing, neither the jurifdic-
ton nor the regularity OF the act. The
Judges did their duty. They gave an ho-.
norAbl proof of their independence. They
lihened to the complaint Of an individual
asaina your PRECEDENT, and have thewr
thenlelves dilpoied to grant redrefs againh
the sreatef man in the government !; it
wrong has been committed, and the con
Riturlon authorizes. their interference will
gentlemen FAY, thar the lecressry OF fate,
or even the Preident is not iubject &c
law And if they violate The law, where
c.n we apply for redreis but to our courts
OF i ace. Enr,, fir, tits. nat tue, sha,
the Judges iAued their mandate TO tn,
executive; they have only called u9on h,
fecresa.y of fate to hew them, tina
| what be has done is right. |, is TN
| an inciplent proceeding which decides no.
thing. 50
Mr.. Giles rofe to explain. He faid,
| tina, the gentleman from Delaware had al.
cribed to him many things which he dio
not fay, aud had Afterwards under' skentC
retuse them. He had only iaid. tia
mandatory procefs had iflued that the
courle purfusd by the Court had indicated
| a belief by them, that they had iuriidieii-
on, and that in the event OF no cauie be,
inc fhewn mandamus would iaue. ~ >.
Mr.. 6ayard, s hue
| / aated the gen,leman's words as j
took them down. 1t is inimaterial whr
! ,her the mittake was In the pentleman's