Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-01-30

oCI< cts only, ana leaves 10 the states a re-
siiuary and lnviolab.c sovereignty over all
cher chj>cts.-This, as general expcsi-
ticn o. the constitution, appears, to me
perfectly correct lit ascertains, upon
principles that result from the relation in
which the national and state govern,sents
stand TO each other, the complete indepen-
dence If each pr nciples, which were
again recognized in the Resolutions passed
by the Assembly OF Virginia in 1899, and
which we're before alluded to.-Anti, look
ing INTO the constitution with these lights,
have not been able 10 perceive in 1t any
ground for the position that the state ausho-
rites can be controlled by the general autho-
rity,cr any portion OF it nor that the latter has
the power to establish the tribunal which
rs to decide controversies between them,
without any appeal by the former ,o that
instrument. That appeal Will nov be made
and, in making It, j shall pass by the pre-
ambe To the constitution, because I can
not perceive that any inference can lac
drawn from it favorable tn the claim of
power now set up: of which | am the
more confident, in as much as it has not
been resorted to. i'm the work before cited.
Tor that purpose and because also, the
construction given to that part of the istrr,-
ment by the report. on which the Resolu-
tons before referred to were founded, has
generally been admitted 70 be correct. That
Construction restricts the means Of obtain
ing the great objects, proposed in the pre-
amble, to the special grants of power
which are to be found in the contribution
Ihe Sd article ct the constitution is an ex
ample OF those means, particularly apply
ing TO the case un'er consideration. 1t de
clares that the Judicial power of the u. 5
en- all he taI it,c 4
such other Courts as the Congress may
from time to time, OF dain and establish
the Judges both of the Supreme and Infe-
rior Courts shall hold their offices during
good behavior, and shall, at stated times,
receive Tor their services a compens ,tion
which shall not be diminished during their
continuance IN o!iice'--How it is possible to
extract from any expression in this article
an authority to this Court to exercise any
OF the Judicial powers of the u. 5. L have
not been able 10 perceive. That the State
Courts by any reasonable construction OF
the article, Can be included in it, | think
impossible. They are not ordained or es-
tablished by the Congress nor is there a
ny thing in the general tenure of
the Offices of the State Judges, which can
bring them within its operation. They are
notresponsible to the general government
for the performance of their duty =; and ir-
responsibility to that power which imposes
duty, would be new principle obv-
ously Incompatible with the acknowledged
principles or our institutions.
The authors of the work referred to,
admit, Up. 223.) that the article recited,
wears the appearance OF combining the eau
ses OF Federal cognizance to the Federal
Courts, and deduCe from it differeAt CON
clusion by train of reasoning which seems
to contound judicial power with the subjects
that may come within its cognizance The
appellate power OF the Supreme Court of
the United States, which is defined in the
I'd section of the article, is not confined TO
cases decided in the Inferior Federal
Courts, to which it plainly refers, but is
supposed to extend to all cases of the same
description in whatever jurt they may
have beef decided, IS if the decisions of
Courts founded on the lee loci necessarily
subjected them to the appellate jurisdiction
OF the government, the laws of which m Y
come in question. The words of the ID
member OF that section are. in all cases
Affecting Ambassadors, other public Mi
nsters ami Consuls, &C., the Supreme
Court shall have original jurisdiction -
In all the other Cases before mentioned,
the Supreme Court shall have appellate
jurisdiction, both as to law and fact. The
obvious relation which appelate power,
vested in the Supreme Court by the fore
gong expressions, bears to the Inferior
Tribunals, TO be ordained, and establishes
by Congress III virtue of the first section Of
the same article, is too manifest to be
questioned but, this construction is fortified
by ether considerations. The appellate
Jurisdiction IS given both as to law and
tact, and, without power in Congress TO
regulate the proceedings in the State
Courts, II extended to those Courts, would
be impracticable, according to the com
mon law rule of trial, which prevailed in
most, if not all, of the State Courts.
An appeal from the facts would be i'm
possible, without a re-examination Of the
witnesses from remote distances, or by de-
positions, in violation of the practice in most,
II not all, of the State Courts. The 9th
article OF the amendments to the Consttu-
ton, furnishes additional light on this view
OF the subject. Plainly referring to the
Courts of the United States, it declares
that, at common law, where the value in
controversy shall exceed twenty dollars
the right of trial by jury shall be preserv-
Cd; and no fact tried by jury shall be o.
therwise re~e6amined in any Court Of the
United States, than according to the rules
OF the Common law. The objects of this
amendment are, first, to preserve the trial
by jury in the Federal Courts and, Sc
conlly, to take from those Courts the pow
er OF rc-eXamining any fact, tried by jury,
otherwise than according to the principles
OF the common law. The two provisions,
Na.N~a