The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-01-16

usulpIuei lo!ioWii!E ustrpaton, must have pro-
ceeded from 4 species OF political infltuation.
which had hoped was fast wearing away.
Should such things AGAIN be, Compare, pray
yo,,. the situation o. en- independent judiciary
wi,it that when the present amendment would
produce. The one afraid to be turned out of OF.
hce and shifting his opinions to suit the prejudccs
OF the times and the e@tgsncies of his situation ::
The other pure, inconuptia;e, firm and dignifed !;
distributing the fountains of justice through its va
rious channels, without favor or affection, and
pursuing the path Of duty with IN unvarying step
Without temptation To scduce, or dangers TO Il
iarm, who, 50 likely TO stand between the govern
nient and the culpr, and to protect the rights of
the citizen from unforeseen or meditated dcstruc-
ton To my Inind there is little danger that a
Judge thus situated will link himself to vice with
out advantage, and prevent the execution of con-
Hutional laws without object. Believing this,
70 not see the danger OF vesting this power in
such Judges, instead of Congress- From It's consti-
tuition & its powers, from its activity, which cna-
bles 1t to do wrong, while the Judiciary is ever
Pdssive from the violence of party heat and par
ty-animosity, which too often pervades our legis-
aatve bodies, from the eagerness with which they
endeavor to etiectuate their ends-often regard
less OF the consequences, 1 confess / do not he
state to prefer an independent judiciary I'd the
Congress OF the United States, as the tribunal to
determine the constitutionality of laws If the
Legislative body was invariably the representative
OF the purity of the people, it might be other
D.
posed to be liable to error and to abuse of power
and for this reason restrictions are placed upon
their authority.
But the right to decide on the Unconstitutional
Ity OF a law, is admitted when we compel Judge
to swear to decide according to the law of the
land, and to maintain the sacred instrument un.
der which he is created. If it be true that his
decisions are to be consonant to kazv and the con-
stltuuon is the supreme TAU, must he not compare
that instrument with those acts which purport to
be made underit. But the gentleman had adj
yanced tins other incomprehensible doctrine, that
treaties and the laws OF Congress are superior or
at least equal to the constitution. We have area-
dy seen to what INDUSTRIOUS opinions this doctrine.
has led INN, and trust that no man here will for
moment hesitate to believe the constitution pa
raInount TO any law, which conflicts with its pro-
VISIONS Is 1t come to this--that III debating ON
amendments, we shall hear the supremacy of the
l.NSs OF Congress miirtained IN derogatisn of the
clSnlty OF the constitution The doctrine wi II
not st;Ad the test of argument, and may safely be
assumed to be incorrect.
Sir, the doctrine of the right of the courts to
decide on the consututionahty of a law, is admit
ted further, by the position once SO strenuousiv
cortended Tor, that the jury had that right In
the case OF Calender, the doctrine was contend
Ell tnr, and the republicans of those DAYS main
tanned its correctnesS-Antl on what principle /?
Not thatthe Judges had usurped power, and that
the Jury had right TO partake of the usurpation,
to decide both laSu and fact and that in deciding
the laso they were necessarily empowered to pro-
nounce on Its constitutionaty 1t was advocated
on the principle that in criminal trials, Jurors were
also 1RGges, and that this, among other rights of
the Judge were devoived upon the Juror. How
is tthat we now for the adoption Of q princi.
pie that must sap the rights Of tho jury Again
II the Judge cannot decide on the question of con.
stItution;dity he cannot instruct the Jury in any
ouler way than to support the law against the
constitutions and when in the prosecution of their
rights, they demand his advice ON the question of
tie validity OF aiaW, he cannot legally extend it
TO them. Thus tllc adoption of principles ike
these, leads us inevitably To the overthrow of all
those n.aHnns we have ever regarded most sacred
1t is not possible, from the iatencss Of the hour
to answer many otherrenarLis of the gentleman
But II the time of the committee will permit. |
sham take some Other opportunity OF doing so.
snail now content myself with few general OBJ
eervations
1t this amendment finds its way into your
constitution, the independence of the judiciary is
gone forever Those provisions which have been
heii sacred among us, which have been thought
.CcSs"Ey 10 secure Vlrtuous administration of
justice. ana which were framed with a view tn
the ices, the weakness and fralties of human nm
-ure, WILDE no more Ii we could fill our bench
Ss with Catos who would fulfil the duties of of
hce with unshrinking firInness--unaweel by the
frown OF usurpers or the resentment ofthe croud
VIZ ST. D. Aou'hl lile seat on IlISCC0-aDd look
ing only to the appreciation of the great BODY of
the nation, who honestly decide, when uninAten
cec by passion, We should have little need of pro
FlsionSi to secure Judicial independence But a.
manklnd arc vicious, frail and corrupt we must
secure wee from temptation and fortify virtue with
the strongest barriers.
L wenty years ago--no man would have vent,,r
ed TO assaii this principle of our constitution
VINO IN orr convention would have dared the
lightning OF HcnFy'S cloqnence, by attempting TO
cut away tins pillar OF oar liberties Would NOT
men at that time have started not less at a promo
sition Ike this, than we should now do at am at
tempt to destroy biennial elections or To create n
president Tor life. ann NOT, Mr. Chairman. to he
understood as the enemy of all amendments =;
But woulJapproach our constitution with can.
ton, and unless cool and calm reflection sbonId
establish the necessity of alteration, would nd
mere 10 that instrument would hesitate TO des
troy inc established maXims OF our ancestors But
~ Ruth the tide ofV'me seems to be graduate
flashing awaythe foundations of our Government
8 with parricida hands we are fastening the DIES.
fguction FIFTY years hence, not one of our sacred
maxlIns may be LETT There is no principle yvbicl,
we rsverence--none which we may not DESTROY
none whicn IS interviewer with the affections of
the nation And without this what is n constitr
hoh vi Little more worth than the parchment
onwhlch IT IS written Ambition and cunning viii
at all times bld reasons sufficient to Justify chan
ges in The frame Of government till the temple Of
our liberty shall be no more.
Look but to Great Britain Every ereot ,,rin.
tfplc gone, except the trial by iurv:-politicaili
hertv buf ,.,.I