Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-05-27

very Wisely dcnlSd the power OF lSSu-
ing such bills TO the states.
The gentleman from Georgia next
read the ist section Of the third Article
of the constitution. should not take
UP the time OF the Seq in noticing
| it, but that the construction which l
then put upon it differs from that which
he gave rs an universal admission.
The gentleman supposed there had
been some departure from the consti-
tuition under the following clause !;
(" The judicial power of the United
States shall be vested in one Supreme
Court, and in such inferior courts as
the Congress may from time to time
ord ain aud establish" The gentleman
observes that at the time of the repeal
Of the Judiciary act, it was generally
admitted by the advocates of the repeal
that the Supreme Court was not tangi-
BILE. That was not the opinion then
expressed (; and the opinion L then
expressed has since that time been
strengthened aud confirmed by further
reflection. do not know how the gen.
tleman's argnnen, can apply to the
case under consideration, unless he
meant 70 shew that the decision in that
2 respect made by Congress was uncon-
. stitutional. NJ opinion is that twas
constitutional, and that Congress might
constitutiona,Iy mod fy and change the
Supreme Cour, in the most essential
point and permit me here TO protest
against the usual mode of constituting
the constitution by analogy. Instead
OF examining the expressi ms of the
constitution itself, TO ascertain its
meaning, we are often referred to Ger.
tain principles borrowed from British
jurists. Thus we are often referred to
the fundamental priaciple of the sepa.
ration OF departments, sc. &c. the in.
|, dependence of judges, &c. although
neither of these terms are to be found
, in the constitution and the principles,
although correct in themselves as
f general principles, ere suhjectin prac-
, tice to material qualifications and Ii
mutations /; and this is particularly the
. case in the constitution. Il appears
to me as easv TO ascertain the tue
meaning of the words used in the
constitution az the meaning of these
T or any other terms and the error in
this mode of reasoning generally ari-
ses from the misapplication of the
terms to the subject in question or
. In other words, when reasoning FROM
analogy, in recoliecting the resem-
blances and overlooking The diHeren.
, ces m cases Supposed TO be analogous.
To ascertain the true meaning of the
. constitution, therefore, have Away
, had reference to its own words, and
discarded allreasonipg from its analogy
to any thing else. Bv referring 70 the
, clause respecting the judicial depart
, ment JUST read, and taking it in con-
nection with the clause which declare 8
that Congress shall have power to
pass all laws which shall be necessary
and proper for carrying into execute
on al the powers, &c. &c. vested in
anv department., &c. 1t will appear
obvious, that Congress might, accor-
ding to the express words Of the con-
stitution, establish the judicial depart.
ment, as it has done and from time
TO time alter or modify it at its discre-
ton. &c--and if Congress thought pro
per TO increase or lessen the number
of judges of the supreme court or
TO increase or lessen the duties 20 be
peri rned by them, would ask,
where IS the constitutional prohibi ion
L see npne---CopgTess cin designate
the duties of the court and the compep.
sation of tie judges. They may take
, away the duties and Of course also the
compensation--apd why Because
we find the service and compen alton
inseparably connected, and the oos
made the .cons,deraton OF the ether
f Congress has ghr 20 desigoate the
SERVICES which the Judges shall p r.
form? And by what authority will
hey r tain compensation after the ser
vict to- be performed are taken away
1t Is not the name of Office Dor good
behaviour in it, ,or which compeasati
on rs constituiionally given, but for
; service rendered. The reason Of this
. article in relation to the supreme court
IS very obvious. 1t was to obtein an
On nitotmity of decision and If
Congress tablIsh one supreme court,
6 hey perfectly satisfy all the iniun~tiVe
part Of thee institution. But, do not
know that the & ntIensE's reference TO
his ciacse could affect the CONSTITUTE