Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-09-14
Unitcd States VS.. .4ler'r. cant5eu.
Your s,

United States VS.. .llear'r, Camh5eU.
Information sled by j. C. Wright, collector of
the for the sth collection district &C Ohio
against Alexander Campb- u, for selling domestic
distilled spirits without license therefor from the
collector, contrary to- the act oil congress ia such
made and provided, and praying g that the sd'
Alexander Campbell may forfeit AID pay the y.
States The OF $50 oliars penalty, AMI also the
further sum OF ) 5 duty by law imposed upon
license 70 retail &c. according to the provisions of
the acts Of congress in such made ard prcvi
ded." sc.
The defendant sled the following exceptions t. the
jurisdiction of this court.
4" And the said Alexander Campbell says, the tie
information filed agsinst him by john -. Wight,
collector, contsins no matter or thing 90 which lie
the said Alexander Campbell is in this court bound
20 answer, cr that the retailing iiQsOr by the quart
is offence against any OF the laws of the state
OF Ohio, o.; e'fences against which laws only this
court can taks jurisdiction and Tor that also by the
constitution OF the state OF Ohio, man can be held
to aRy offence ia the courts Ofthe said
except upon Indictment presenIment of a grand
jury, wherefore the said Alexander Campbell pravs
that he may be discharged from answering said
information, and that the same may he qusshed-C.
Hammond, attorney for defendant"
Judge TAPPAN---Th his is q very important uues-
ton Of jurisdiction, upon which, If ! had doubts, |
wsild take further time to deliberate before giving
opinion as have none, ! win not delay the
cause by continuance, but proceed to give my O.
prevent my sdyertin, to many of the reasons and
grounds Wherein that opinion is founded.
There can be no hesitation in asserting that pro-
cesding by information is Il criminal prose cuon end
that it hath always been used as suSh-4tii Bl. Com
Chan. Esd, the king u.s. Berchet aud others LIST
Shower, 106-I refer to these authorities as fully
supporting both propositions.
The FIRST question will then be, can the L. States
proseeute for offences against their laws ia their
state courts'
@I,o
the United States and the Constitution OF this
Slate.
The State Folio is sovereign and independent
State, not comfortable by any earthly powe in the
making or adminslrstiou oiits laws, EXCEPT only in
such particulars as ii hath delegated poitnn Of thst
sovereignty 10 the u. 5. by the federal constitutions
aud rs il hath Limited; itseiin the exercise Of power
BY the same CO.. Stitftion.
= The Constitution of tie u. s. creates distinct
and sepatatc,goyerrment from the several state go
vernments and delegates specific and limited pow
ers TO the government 81 created. By the Sd arti-
Gle, section * ., the Juecia power cithe U. S.
shall be vested IN one supreme court and IN such IN
fcrior rs the Congress may from time 10 time
ordsin and esiablish-and Tho Judicial power
shall extend To I'll cases in law and equity arising
under this constitution, the laws of the u. s. and
trcs,ies made or HhiCh shall be made under their
authority TO All cases affecting ambassadors, other
puble ministers and consuls to NJ! cases Of adni-
rally, and Inn jurisdiction IN Controversies TO
al power of the u 5. extends 10 the before
this court, and that power is wholly vested in the
u. S's courts the supreme cour; Of the U. s. hath
an appellate Jurisdiction in all controversies to which
the u. $. shall bea party there is no caEse 10 the
constitution of the u. ). which authorizes congress
{ give jurisdiction to the STATE courts, 10 require
the performance Of any Judicial dueo OF them It
cannot be said that congress by their laws ordained
and established US 2 court If the L. S.; for by the
operation Of the Sh secton Of thc Ga article OF the
constitution oi this state f such were the fact, W.
should cease to be 2 state court and viii il be ina
gined that an appeal can be taken from tits court
To q r supreme court Of the y. States The pow
ers not delegated to the u. s. by the constitution
are expressly reserved t. the states 90 tic peo-
pie il follows necessarily and clearly to my mind,
tst congress has no power TO any ju .siistlJu
whatever ~ tie state courts.
This is a criminal prosccutoa j; may well be
doubted whether one severe ign STATE sue IN the
muIicipal courts ofanother stste but waving this
point rs not necessary 20 be here decided, assume
it 10 be settled principle IL fiiisprudence. that
one sovereign state cannot make use Of the muuis
pal courts Of an Their government enforce cts PEE
nal laws. No one would doOb' for an instant, iffhe
government ofG Britain or Ffaucr, or even one
al the other States of the UnOn, we're 10 attemstc
to nanain criminal prosecution in Is, that
would not ne permitted and yet, as its iod;ci-
nj power and its penal laws, the government Of The
u s. rs mach IN independent state and separate
government as g. Britain, France, or either OF the
T. States
II hath been urged, thai the constitution gives to
congress the power 10 lay and collect taxes, dnCcs
imposts, exeises, SC. u 70 make all laws whieI