Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1816-04-13


there was any interes on which that treaty, what
ever be ITS proper construction, would operate.
Ihis difficulty was felt, and weighed IN he case
OF Smith and the State of Maryland, and the de-
cislon was founded upon the idea that this Court
was not thus restricted.
But another difficulty presented itself: The
treaty of'9f had become the supreme law ofthe
land since the judgment rendered in he court
below, The defendant, who was at that time an
alien, had now become confirmed IN his rights
under that treaty, This would have been no OBJ
Jection' to the correctness of the original iude-
ihent were We then at liberty to notice that
treaty in rendering the Judgment of his court z
Having dssented from the opinlon of the court
below, OH the question of title this difficulty
not present itself IN any way, in the view / then
took OF the case But the majority ofthis COURT
determined that, as public law, the treaty was
part OF me law, the treaty was part of the law
OF every case depending in this court; that as
such, 1t was not necessary that it should he ,prat
upon the record, and hat il was obligatory I'M.
Oh inns court,n rendering judgment upon this
writ OF error, notwithstanding The original iusIg.
| inent may have been otherwise unimneacRabie.
ana TO this opinion yielded my hearty assent.
FOR II cannot be maintained that this court "a
bound to give Judgment unlawful at the time
Oh .endering it, III consideration that the same
Judgment would have been lawful at any nrio,.
tuns. what judgment can now be lawfully ren-
dered between the parties is the question tn
which the attention of the court is called And
! II the law which sanctioned the or,,rnal ;ndr
ineh'' expire, pending an appeal, ,hs court has
| repeatedly reversed the Judgment below. altSos
rendered whist the aw existed. So too, fpIain.
TIT IN error die, pending SUIT, and his land des.
cend on an alien it cannot be commended that this
court wall maintain the suit IN right OF the iudp.
ment, in favor Of his ancestor, not,y;thstondinor
his present disability. o
1t must here be recollected, that this is an mr.
ton ofejectment. 1.-THE ;er1n formally declared
| upon expires, pending the action, the court villa
permit the plaintiff 10 amend, by extending the,
| term-Why because altho' the right NAV have
Deeh IN nm at thecommencemento of The SUIT. it
| mas ceased before Jud 5ment, and without this A.
| mendment he would not have Judgment Rut.
suppose the suit were really instituted 10 obtain,
possession OF lease-hold, and the lease exnre
before Judgment, would the court permit ,he,
party TO amend in opposition to the right of tI,e,
case On the contrary, if the term formally de-
cisred on were more exclusive than the lease II,
| winch the legal title was founded. could tbe,
I give Judgment for more than facts II nust ~
| recnilected, that under this Judgment n -,r;t n &
| restitution IS the fruit Of the law This ~ -
| very nature, has relation to- and must be found.
ed upon, present existing right at The tine
OF Judgment. And whatever be the cause VIII CHI
| takes this right away, the remedy rnust In ,b.
reason and nature of things, fail with il.
When all these incidental points are dis,os.,g
Or we nhd Tue question finally reduced To ib,s-
does he judicial power of the Un ted States e,,-
!ehu 70 the revision OF decisions of state courts
III cases arising under treaties But, in order n,
BeeFise lhe question, and present il in the true
ioIHi III winch II presents Itself m this casa no
| wih enquire whether the Constitution sanct;npe
the exercise OF a revising power over the deS;s;-
ois OF sta'e tribunals, IN those cases in which tb
Juolc'al power OF The United States extends
ana mere II appears 10 me, that the great diff:
, ,euy ID On me other side. The real doubt, whe
tler tle STATE tribunals can cons.itutonally exer.
cISe jurisdiction IN any OF the cases in S,I;cI ,l
judicial power of the Unlted States extend
S9he cesslon OF Judicial power IS contemnIo.
ted oy the third article of h. cons itu,io1. That
winch is coded can no longer be retained In
one OF he circuit cour OF the United S, ates II
mas Oeen decided (wsth what Correctness VII
| not say that the cess or ofap wer IN r,.ss 60,
form act ofbankruptcy, although not acaJ ~, 49,.
tue United States, deprves the states of tba -, w
| e. OF passing laws to hat effect. Wtb rao,rT
10 the admiralty and maritime iurisd IN -
would De difficult to prove that the sta &c co,I5
resume II, II the United States should abnI;sb
t,e courts vested WI uIat jurlsd ction-vet 4 ;e
- ~ WIN 'iie other Gases of jurisdic ion, in
Tue "a section otthe Sd article, and ceded in the
| same words NSN'o III tne
bGt 1t IS commended, that the Cd. section the sd
article Contains no expression of cession of ;ur;s
ulcIlon That II only vests power Jr Congress 10
10 uHe Jurisd cuon 10 the extent therein expres.
| 80, nm u4usF tuls mead arose the discussion
on lhe construction proper to be piven 70 ,b+
article On this part of the case sbaU 'r ,st
pause long. The rules of CONSTRUCTION ,ybar.
| vac nature OF the Instrument is as CERTAIN o.
FAMILIAR 10 every one To me the const,tt,5;on on,
pears IN every line Of it, to be contract. which
| M le6Si language, may be denomnated rin,rtite
i rhe paroles are the People, the States and the
TEND that 1t processes to be The eTcIs,ye
| Ihe people, for what nave the people done hut r.,
| FORM hls compact That the states are recnc-.
| hiSeu as PafueS to Il, IS evident from vsr,o5s
passages, ana particularly that IN which the nm
yea o's'es guarantee TO each stale repubi can
loiih VI government The security and happj-
ness OF The whole was the object and IN ,,rogta.
dissentiOn and collision, each surtender.d IL
powers winch might make them dangero,s -,
each other. We'll aware Of the sens,t,,. 800;
liability OF sovereign states where their u,,I,s 49,,
interests clash, they placed themselves. with re.
gard 10 each other, on The footing of soverei,rns
upon me ocean, where power IS mutually con.
Ceuea 70 &C upon, the ndY dual but tl,e pst,opaI
Nessei must remain unviolated. But 10 remove
an ground for jealousy and complaint, they re-.
iinquSh the privilege Of beng any LONGER tbe ex.
CiusNe arDiters OF their own justice where The
rights OF olhers come IN question, or the p.c.t
interests OF the whole may be affected by Ibose
Ie.ulBs' P'rtSliiies or prejddlces, which they
meant to put down forever.
Nor shall enter into q minute discussion, on
the meaning OF the language Of this sect on, .
nave seldom found much good result from hvpsr-
critical severity, IN examining the d stinet f5rrs
OF verbs Language IS essentially detective In
precision more 50 than those are aware Of VIM
are not in The habit Of subiectng 1t to pb,Iolooi
Cal analysis. In the case before us. for nstapSe
arigid construction might be made, which woulj
ahhihilate The powers intended TO be coded TIE
words are, " shall extend :" but tb.t wb ch
eEiends 70, does not necessarily faci,s ;s 40 tbot
me circle may enlarge until II reaches The OBJ
Jec's .hst limit II, and yet not take Them in. But
the plan and obvious sense and rncay;,,. s. -