Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1801-1806, 1802-02-06

! they have 10 PERFORM, CALI upon them 90 ex-
pound nut only the laws, bus rhc conftitution al
70. in which Is involved the power Of checking
the legi1atur 10 cafe il fhould pafs any laws in
violation of the conaitution.-For this rcaion il
was more important that the judges in this coon-
try fhou.d be placed beyond the contsoul Of the
legiilaturc than in other countries whe reno fuch
power attaches 20 them.
Mr.. Mafon challenged gentlemen to cxhib-
IL hngle inaanee, belde that lately furnifhed
by Maryland, Of legislative act. repeating a
Law pafed in execution of contribution, under
which the judges held their Offices during good
! behavior. In truth, no foch power exiAed, nor
was il in the power of any leginiton. 20 cir
cumitanced. by Jingle law TO daih them out Of
exiaence.
The opinion of Mr.. Mafon, therefore, was
that this lcgila'urc have no right 10 repeal the
judiciary law. For fpch an act would be in di-
rect violation of rhe conaitution.
The conaituiion fays -" Tne judicial
power of the United States fhall be yeftei in
one Supreme Court. and in fuch Inferior Courts
a. the Congreis may, from time TO time, ordsin
and eAsblifh. The judges. both Of the Su.
prcme ard Inferior Court, fhal hold their Offices
during their good bshsvior, ssd ihsll, at fsted
times, receive for their fcryices, compensation,
which ihall not be dminiihed during their con.
| tinuance in Office"
Thus il fays, (" the judges BaN koi1 their
Offices during good behavior" How can this
direction Of the conRitu ton be complied with,
il The leginaturc hs. from feilion to feiion, re-
. peal the lay under which the Office is held and
,smove fbe .1dee. He did not conceive that any
words, which human Ingenuity could devife.
could more completely get over the remarks thar
had been made by the gentleman from Ken
! lucky. Bot that gentleman iays, that th'.
proviiion Of the conftu,ion applies exclufvely
| to the PreGdcnt. He con6ders il as made 10
iuperiede the powers of the Pfefidsnt TO remove
| the judges. But could this have been the con-
temptation of the trainers oi she contribution,
when even the right of the Prlident 10 remove
officers at pleafurc, was matter OF great doubt,
and had divided in opinion our mott cplighten-
ed citizens. Not that he haicd this cireum-
Rance, becaufe he had doubts. Hc thought the
Prsddent ought TO have the right but it did
not emanatc from the conliitution was not ex-
prefsly found in the contribution but fprang
from legina,ivc conaruetion.
BeGde,, if Congreis have the right to re.
peal the whole OF the law, they muR PoGefs the
right 10 repeal the law 20 Ear as IL applies TO
particular diarid, and thus get rid OF an obnoxi-
Gus judge. They may remove his Office from
him. Would it not be abiurd Rill to fay. tha,
the removed judge held bis Office during good
| The contribution hys, "The Judges, fhalI,
at Aatsd times. receive for their fesvioss CON-
peniation. which fhall not be diminifhed during
their continuance in Office" Why this provi.
foni Why guard againa the power to deprive
the judges of their pay 10 a diminution of il and
| not provide againft what was more important,
their exiitencc-
MIR. Mafon knew thar legilaiive body
war occaionally fabjeet TO the dominance Of
| violent paiIions he knew, that they might pafs
unconaitutional laws and that the judges,
TO foppor the contribution. would refuit TO car.
ry them into effect and he knew that the lcgif.
| iatnie might contend for tle execution OF their
Harutes. Hence the neceiIity Of placing the
lodges above the influence Of thefc paflious and
tor ,hese reafon' the contribution had pat them
out of the power of the lcgils,urc.
Still, II gcntlsmen wopld not agree with
| him a. to the unconaitutionalty OF the meafurc
propoled, he would ak, was it espedicnt Z
Were there not grea, doubts exiting through
out the United States ; Ought not each gentle
man to fay. though ] uay hase no doubts OF
heiitancy, are not large portion OF our citizens
of opinion, that it would violate the confti,u
sion Ifthis divcrfty Of fentiment exits, ought
not the evils under the judiciary law to be very
great before we touch il ! Ought we not to aim
at barmoniGng inAead of dividing our citizens :
Was not the contribution facred inilruucnt an
inRrumcnt ever to be approached with rever.
erce an intrument which ought not lightly
TO he drawn from its hallowed retreat, and fub-
jetted to the aux and rehux of patton. But.
where is the evil complained Off This iyfem
was eaaiAiihed only laa feiiion Scarcely had il
been.yet organized fearcely bad we tried it
on its very threfhold; where then the neoeiI;y
Of being 70 pointed, as TO denroy yaem fcarcc-
ly formed three days ago. Does not this mani.
iefs precipitation VIII il not manfcf more
magnanimity, more nationality to abide by j;
until We try it inacad Of taking up pen and
dAihing il out Of exaenec
The reafon that the fuiu depending were
not 70 numerous. aroie from the nature Of the
old eaablihmenr. That eaabliihmem had no
parallel. II carried with il the feeds Of iis own
diaoution. No iet Of judges could be found
phyhcally hardy enough 10 execute il. Such
was the labor OF their duties, that they were de-
nie,' time For ifudy or improvement. Beiides
cafe was heard at one term by one judge, and
poaroned for confederation TO the nsXt term.
AZ that term another JUDGE appeared, and all the