The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1809-05-12

Miserable indeed must be the conditim q
that community where the law is unsettled
and decisions upon the very point are disre
gardcd when they again come, directly o
indirectly, into discussion. In such STAT
of things good men have nothing TO hoprS
and bad men nothing to fear. There is M
standard by which the rights of property
and the most estimable privileges to whicj
the citizen is entitled can be regulated ~.
All is doubt and uncertainty until the judgeI
has pronounced the law of the particulalI
case before him; but which carries with il
no authority as to a similar case between o.
Their parties:
But,suppose for moment, against the set
tied law upon the l.,int, that the court of
appeals had not a power to re examine the
verdict of the jury in the case of the Active !;
and on that account that the decree of the
district court, iii opposition to that of the
court OF admiralty WIS erroneous, il does
not therefore follow that the district Court
had no Jurisdiction of the case on which this
process issued. 1T erroneous, it could only
be re-cxamined and corrected in a superior
court But it the subject depended upon "a
question OF prize or no prize, it was COM
pletely within the cognizance of the district
court by the constitution and laws OF the
United States the former of which grants
to the federal courts, and the latter to the
district courts, c0Snizance Of all civil cate
lses Of admiralty and maritime jtrfsdictienl
This rs such q case and VIC consider thai
circumstance to be decisive of the first pains
We are happy ON this occasion. as we ard
upon all others. to coincide in opinion Will,
the learned and respectable gentIemaj'
who presides in the supreme Judiciary of this
state.*
The next ground of objection to the iuris.
dlction OF the district court is, that the state
of Pennsylvania claimed an interest in the
subject i'll dispute between the parties to that
cause.
The amendment to the constitution upon
WATCH this question occurs, declares that
:" the judicial power of the United States
snail not be construed to extend to any suit
III lay or equity commenced or prosecuted
against one Of the United States, by citi-
zens OF another state, or by citizens or sub
IJects oil any foreign state" 1t is certain
that the suit Ill the district court was not
commenced or prosecuted against the state
lef pennsylvania. She was in no respect n
party to that suit. But it is commended that
under fair construction of this amendment,
II state claims an interest in the subject
IN dispute. the case is not cognizable in d
federal court. In iiost cases it will be found
that the soundest and safest rule by Which
to arrive at the meaning and intention az
law, is to abide by the words which the law
maker has used If he has expressed him.
self so ambiguously that the plain interpre-
tation of the words would lead to absJr,Eytg
and to Il contradiction of the obvious inten
ton OF the law, more liberal course niab
be pursued. But it upon any occasion .a.a
sti1ct rule should be observed, it ought to bt
III expounding the constitution; although !
40 hot mean to say that even in that CASE
this rule should be nfiexibe Every reason
ODDOSed n thtAC d.I T.,
by the defendants counsel and 10 our a;,-
prehension, there is not one sound reason i'm
favor OF 1t. 1T the title to the thing u, X s.
pute be In the state, and this is madz rap
pear to the court, it is inconceiveable that
the plaintiff should recover so as to di sturb
that right. But if ne should recover, the
state would not be bound by the judgment
not being party to it. This is by no means
new case--If one observation-disclosures .judg-
ment or decree against another, the interest
OF third person, not party, will not be
bound or prejudiced by the decision buthe
may nevertheless assert his right in a court
OF justice against the party in possession of
the property to which he claims title. The
state cannot be forced into court, but she
may come there if she Dleases, in pursuit
OF her rights, and will no doubt do so upon
ALL proper and necessary occasions. But if
on the other hand, the mere claim OF inte-
test ny state III the subject IN dispute be-
tween two citizens can have the magic eff
feet of suspending all the functions of a
court OF justice over that subject, and of sn-
nlhiiatInS its DEGREES when pronounced this
effective and necessary branch of our gov
eminent, and Of all free governments, may
De rendered useless at any moment, at the
pleasure of State. If the suit be prosecr-
ted against state, the court perceiyes at
once Its want OF jurisdiction, and can dis
miss the party at the threshold. But il a
latent Claim IN the state, not known by any
or the htlSant parties, is sufficient TO Gust
the jurisdiction, to annul the Judgment when
rendered, and TO affect all the parties con-
cernca with the consequences of carrynf;
Voia Judgment into execution, the federal
courts may become more than uselcss--they
VIII be traps in which unwary suffers may
be ehsDared TO their ruin. To Illustrate
TINS Position the district attorney mentioned
many very strong and very supDci able ca
ses. viii add one other, n. sizes 4. for
aeot, or Tor property either real or personal
III us possession. Conscious that he must
pay the money, or lose his possession in
consequence OF the unduestionabe title Of
MS adversary, b. pays over the money, or
conveys the property even pending the suit,
70 third person, for the use of the state
and by this operation arrests the further
progress of the suit, or avoids the judgment
whenever it shall pass. A doctrine so nm
just, and big with consequences so alarming,
and SO fatal TO the general government,
should have strong and unequivocal woitls