Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-09-28

dicuoa of The S. Co, satisfied JaRy, by con
Inning that jurisdiction TO cases coming ON
inferior FEDERAL tribunals because | further
believe that powe. SD important, and as nou
claimed, 50 overwhelming to the states. il
meant To he given, would have been given, in
PLAN lang,age, which we could all understand,
and would not have been left TO differences
ana deductions requiring eight columns and I,
h;il al close print in gazette {; because also
bciicve that congress have no power To pre-
scribe Tor state courts, regulations preparatory
10 an appeal, nor power To punish state judg-
es Tor dsregarding such regulations powers
which they must have, if the appellate juris-
diction Ofthe S. G.. be not confined ms above
stated to inferior federal tribunals: and be-
cause do further believe, that the first propo-
sltion announced IN the late published opinion
oil the - Z. To wit, that these words 90 the ii-
diciai power of the u. States extends to all
cases III law and equity arising under the
constitution, laws and treaties of the United
States" give jurisdiction oy CIR serereiun STATES.
is erroneous, and moreover if that opinion
Were right, that the clause of the constitution,
winch gives TO the s. G.. original jurisdiction
lnihose cases in which state shall be party,
aud appellate jurisdiction in all the other ca
ses, iorbad any inference from it favorable to
| the appellate jurisdiction, then asserted by the
S. G..
Such being my opinions, deliberately form
ed, they shall be decently though firmly main
ta!neu. NO possible injury can result from
| the investigation. Truth spoken by the S.
Z. is irresistible, and will inevitably crush the
error, however frequently or boldly, or by
whomsoever opposed to it. All that ! fear is,
that even error, when it comes from such
tribunal as the S. G. will be too powerful for
truth unless supported by the nation itself.
The Importance of this question will Justify
a few words more. wish it to be distinctly
understood, that my conduct during the last
winter, was not influenced in the smallest de-
gree, by that natural tendency, which even
the firmest feel, and which til. firmest only
can resist, to so with majority. My opinion
had been formed years before, under circum-
stances, peculiarly suspicious to a fair and sa-
tlsiactory investigation. The bar of the court
OF appeals, had been invited by the court to
examine this question, presented in the case
OF Hunter and Martin, and to communicate
the result to the court. | had taken it for
granted, ,c'thom enquiry, that the S. G. did
possess this appellate power and actually left
the court latter hearing the first days argument,
in support of the jurisdiction, under an impress
SION that the argument was correct. The pre-
sent attorney general went with me from
the capitol to my house, and in the course OF
conversation with him, dscerntd the real
points On which the question depended. l
mention this fact, for the purpose of showing,
that the opinion which / entertain, right or
wrong, was formed several years ago, aud no.
nestly formed
not only adhere TO the opinion expressed
IN the resolutions of last winter, but to another
maintained in debate. By the opponents of
the resolutions, It was urged that the case was
not OF sufficient magnitude, to Justify the
lnterposition oftlie legislature believed then
what the >. Z. have since said, that it WAS
case OF vital Importance and | contendcd that
1t was the duty of the legislature to stand
centinel perpetually over the constitution of
the u, ). that every violation of it ought To
be notlced that no case ought TO be regarded
as trivial that our constitution was vet in its
infancy, and i'll the vicssitude of human affairs,
new points must frequently occur, the decision
OF which should be observed with unwearied
attention. In defiance of all our care and
| vigilance, time will shew that principles have
been established, susceptible of an application,
| which we did not foresee: what then are we
to expect, IT weremain inattentive or supine /?
Little did anticipate while opposing the APP
peliate jurisdiction of the S. G.. over state tri-
bunals, In cases between individuals, the ar
rival of this period, at which jurisdiction is
claimed and asserted by the S. G.. in oil cases
arising under the constitution, laws or treaties
oi the 40. even where they have been deCid-
ed by state tribunal, and the state itsefis par
ty to the prosecution.
But while advocating this doctrine, did
not announce mysclfas the advocate of state
rights. On the contrary, / declared my fixed
determination at all times, and under all cir
cumstances, to maintain and support the rights
oil the general government as firmly as the
rights OF The states {: to support right, wher-
| ever it might be.
1t would have given me great pleasure, if
could have devoted great portion of the time
winch may yet reman for me, to the cxamin-
| alton OF questions of constitutional law Such
was once my hope. 1t is gone.
/ am respectfully your
fellow citizen,
Sept. ed, 1921. GEORGE HAY.