Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1816-02-01
VOL. mo. So.

| non dhcernnF.
In deciding whether the Jurisdiction Civ
en- to the Federal Courts by the Consti;u.
ton, is confined to those Courts, or is ,x-
tensve enough to control that Of the State
| Courts also, in the case of treaties, the
first remark which occurs, is, that it would
be diihcult to draw the line under the actu-
| al provisions of the Constitutions, between
4 total and partial Interference. The first,
as well as last, depends upon tine discretion
| OF Congress, and vet it Can hardly be pre-
! sumed that the Constitution intended that
the State authorities, on this subiet,
| should be wholly invaded and set ASIDE,
! when, In the sixth article thereof it re-
cognizcs the power Of the State Judges, o.
yer treaties. and provides for their being
| sworn to observe them.
| 1t is next to be observed, that. naturally
| Che jurisdiction grated to government,
is confined to the Courts of that govern
msnt. 1t does not, naturally, run into and
| AFFECT the Courts of another and distinct
| government ; whether that government o.
| perstes upon the same, or another tract OF
| COUNTRY. In relation to another and dis
tnct government, acting upon anotherter-
! ritory, the position is undeniab'y clear: nor
IS 1t less so, in the CASE before us, if the be-
tore mentioned ideas relative TO the nature
and effect of federal republics, in general
l..
II this principle be true, in general, il
will become SO, a fortiori, if. in all the 9TH
er parts or the Constitution, on the subject
OF jurisdiction, the Federal Courts are, a.
lone, contemplate !; and if, in all other
instances, the federal authorities act direct
y upon the people, and not through the
medium of those of the States. Both of
those positions appear to me, to be unques-
tionably true.
AS to the first :--it viii be seen, that the
first section, OF the third article Of the Con-
stltution' relates. solely and exclusively.
to the Courts of the u. States. 1t pro-
vides for their establishment, for their te-
nnre in othce. and their salaries. 1t las
no eye to the state tribunals. So in the
last clause, OF the second sechon of the
third article, providing, that the trial Of all
crimes shall be by jury, and be held in the q
STATE III which such crimes shall have
been committed, the Federal Courts are.
exclusively, contemplated: it would have
been absurd, to have provided, that the
Courts of a State, which has no jurisdic.
ton beyond its limits, should be held
within those limits. This clause, then.
OF the very section in question:, in this case,
being, undoubtedly, confined to the Fedsr-
al Courts, it would clearly follow, in a case
OF doubt, that the whole section was sub
Ject to the same restriction.-The same
restriction is kept up, in the amendments
subsequently adopted ia the Constitution. In
the eighth amendment, it is provided. that
the accused shall have right to speedy
trial, by a jury ofthe STATE and district
IN which the crime shall have been commit
ted provision wholly superhuous and
absurd, as relative TO the State Courts
30 in the ninth amendment, providing that
III cases of the value of twenty dollars, the
right of jury trial shall be preserved, ir
wdi not be contended, that it relates to
the jurisdiction of the State Courts as
most OF the State Constitutions had, alrea-
dy, provided for the nyiolability of Jury
tral, and tho State governme always
claimed and exercised the power to saw
under what limitations and restriction
the jury trial shall prevail in their Courts.
1t is also to be borne in mind, that one OF
the last amendments to the Constitution.
which declares, that the judicial power OF
the u. States, shall noI be construed TO e5c-
tend to suits brought against State, by CT
tizcns of anolh r State, or of a FOREIGN
State, is confined to the Federal Courts, IN.
exclusion of those of the States for, if the
State Courts were also iHhipi,ed from this
jurisdiction, the parties iast mentioned
would be left without any redress whrtev-
CT, when aggrieved by State II, then.
III every o,her part of the Constellation,
which respects jurisdiction, the Fede raj
Courts. alone. are contemplated, and il, in
an important clause of the very section now
i'll question, the restrictive construction is
found to prevail, it would seem natural
consequence, that it should pre-, all, SO.
IN the remaining part of that section
1t, in addition TO these considerations. IL
be also recollected, that the Constitution az
the u. States, in almost TO other instance
acts through the governments Of the sever
al States, the probability will be encreased.
that It did not mean TO act through them.
or intermeddle with them, in The cas-,
in question. The great grievance
complained of under the articles If
confederation, was, that they acted or'y
through The States, VIII ch States pdlscI
the arm of the general government, AZ
their will and pleasure. 10 remedy this
evil, an ensire new system was adopted, by
which the general government acted d.
rectly upon the people. No instances are
atpreseUt re- elected in which the co.or-
Grafton of the State governments is neccs-
sary, but for the purpose of elecling Pre-
sdent and Senator'S. in ell other iist ~
ces the governments are entirely seperate
and distinct: and every provision cf tie
Constitution, viii be construed in reference
to this feature Of the government.
Bearing these principles ia mind, 1t rs
proceed to enquire into the me9nng Of tie
second section of the third article Of the
Constitution. 50 far as it relates e. the case