Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-04-13

substance no more than mode Of COM
pelling the opposite party to appear before
this Court, aud maintain the legality of his
Judgment obtained before. An exempli-
rication of a record is the common proper
ty of every one who chooses to apply and
pay for it, & thus the case and the parties
are brought before us. And so far is the
court itself from being brought under the
revising power of this court, that nothing
hut the case as presented by the record
and plead'ngs OF the parties are considered,
and the opinions OF the court are never re
sorted to unless for the purpose of asss-
ting this court i'll forming their own
opinion.
The absolute necessity that there was
tor Congress to exercise something of a
revising power over the cases and parties
in the state courts, will appear from this
consideration.
Suppose the whole extent of the judicial
power of the United States vested i'll their
own courts, yet such provision would not
answer all the ends of the constitution for
two reasons
LIST. Although the plaintiff may in such
case have the full benefit of the CONSTITUTES
on extended to him, yet the defendant
would not as the plaintiff might force him
2dly. Supposing it possible so to legislate
as to give the Courts of the United States
original jurisdiction in all cases arising un-
der the constitution, laws, &c. in the words
OF the Cd section of Sd ART. Ga point on
which l have some doubt, and which in
time might perhaps render the quo minus
fiction OF Great Britain, or wiling con-
struction, greatly accumulate the jurisdic-
ton OF those courts), yet very large class
of cases would remain unprovided for. In
cidental questions would often arise, and
as court of competent jurisdiction in the
principal case, must decide all such ques
tions, whichever laws they arise under, end
less might be the diversity of decision
throughout the union upon the constitution,
treaties and laws of the United States a
subject on which the tranquility of the uni
on internally and externally may mater-
ally depend.
should feel the more hesitation in a.
doping the opinions which l express in
this case, Were l not firmly convinced that
they are practical. and may be acted upon
without compromising the harmony of the
union, or bringing humility upon the state
tribunals. God forbid that the judicial
power in these states should ever, for a
moment, even in its humblest departments,
feel doubt of its own ind pendence.-
Whilst adjudicatng N a SUBJECT which
the laws of the country assign finaily to the
revising power of another tribu al, it can
feel No such doubt. An anxiety to do JUS
tice is ever relieved by the knowledge that
what we do is not final betwes n the par
ties. And no sense of dependence can be
felt from the knowledge that the parties,
not the court, may be summoned before "a
mother ribunal.-With this view, by means
Of laws avoiding juds nents obtaiaed in the
state courts. In cases over which Congress
has consdtutionally assumed jurisdiction,
and infiIcting penalties On parties who shall
contumaciously persist in infringing the
constitutional rights of others-under a Ii
berai extension of the writ OF injunction &
the habeas corpus adj subjiciendum. fat
ter myself that the full extent of the con-
sttutional revising power may be secured
to the United States, and the benefits of it
to the individual, without ever resorting to
compulsory or restrictive process upon the
state tribunals--a right which. repeat a
gain, Congress has not asserted, nor has
this court asserted, nor does there appear
any necessity for asserting.
The remaining points in the case being
mere questions of practice, | shall make no
remarks upon them.
-----==z===zz==zZzSz %><szszsz =zz==--------