Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-07-13

court give us no satisfaction. They have no.
vouchsaicc TO give name TO this new crea-
ton of their fancy. TO the common appre-
henslon or men, this case Possesses all the
properties ola regular suit. LISA con.rovcr-
sy between two parties, before court uf JUS
tlce, touching some matter OF RICH: or the re-
dress OF some wrong. In technical iaogna.c,
there Is actor, re3s and jnder "A piaiai!E ID
dsfcndau and Il Judge. The court say, how
ever, that salt demands 8. the being pa, into
possession of that right whereof the party IN
jured is deprived" Let me ask whether the
case before us does not come completely up
TO this definition? The Cohcns sllcgc that
they were improperly condemned to pay a
fine bya state court. They appeal to the SUI
preme court for redress. II tia; redress had
been granted, would they not have been a. put
INTO possession of that right whereof they
| were deprived? The case, therefore, in
the supreme court was a sui by the Cohens
VS.. Virginia, according TO Backstonc's dciini-
ton The uniform language ofthc law desig-
mates the appellant ms the plaintiff in error
and the appellee rs the defendant We are
told that Lords Coke and Bacon law down the
position that a release OF all actions will en-
braceawrit ofcrrorfthc plaintiff may rccoveror
be restored to any thing, bat where he is not
to be SO restored, it will not have that effect
Ii is To be observed that the court here change
the word Su'tS into the word actions, and treat
them as ii they were perfectly SYNONYMOUS
| IN discussion of this sort, the slightest shade
OIL difference between words may be ofim-
| portancc; and since the court have Invited
this discussion, they ought to have shewn that
the two words mean precisely the same thing
may be permitted to suggest doubt wheth-
or Suts IS not term of larger import than
dc',onS. but these are grave and weighty
matters, only fit to be handled by those who
are regularly initiated. am forcibly remind
ed oil the saying of some author, that when a
grammarlan treats of political science, the af-
lars oil state become mere questions of syn
| tax.
| There is only one clue to extricate us from
TINS labyrinth ofsubtleties by which the court
nave enueavoured TO pcrpleX our understand
| lhSs. rms clue is, to keep III view the mani
| lest OBJECT of the amendment, and TO give if
that construction which will best promote the
end proposed. have already slewn, that its
oplect was to exempt the states from federal
jurisdiction where an individual was a party,
and where they did not submit roluntalqfv 10
such jurisdiction. If this be the true spirit OF
the amendment, | ask if it is not as much vio-
lated by allowing an individual to compel a
state to appear in federal court by appeal as
Dy permitting him to bring a suit originally in
exists III both cases, and the state is i'm each
equally dragged against its consent into fe-
derai coart This will further appear, if we
ADVERT to the qualification of the rule, which
nave admitted TO exist | have said that a
| STATE may bring suit in an inferior federal
court, and that if the defendant be cast. lie
may appeal to the supreme court, and why
Because the state by bringing the suit in the
federal court has waived the privilege intend
ed by the constitution for its benefit, and has
thereby submitted voluntarily TO all the conse-
qucnces of that mode of proceeding, Gne OF
| "hich is, that an appeal may he taken 70 the
supreme court. But can it be said without
mockery, that when state brings . suit in a
state court it thereby consents to the appellate
jurisdiction of federal court ? On tie con-
trary, does it not emphatically express its dis
appreciation of that course OF proceeding. by
bringing its suit before state tribunal 1t is
evident that the principles of the supreme
court VIII virtually repeal the amendment al
together. For ii an appeal from the decision
oi a slate court TO federal court be not a suit
and therefore not embraced by the amend
ment, it follows that every case between a
state and an individual may be brought be-
iore the federal court by appeal and the a
meldment, in saying that the Judicial pow
er shall not be construed to extend TO any suit.
NC. commenced or prosecuted against one OF
the U. States by citizens of another state" &c
becomes mere nullity. There is perhaps
one exception to the generality of this asser.
ton; but that on examination will be found 70
be- merely nominal. 1t may be said that the
amendment will still prohibit an individual
from originating a suit in federal court but
TINS exception will be of no importance, since
the individual may bring his suit in the state
court, and afterwards, if necessary carry il
by appeal to the federal court. Thus this a.
mendment which was evidently designed for
purposes highly interesting to the states
dWlndles away to a nominal, iIllsory and I'M
substantial security. ] put it to the candor OF
the supreme court themselves, whether they
believe that such construction would meet
the views of those who framed the amend.
ment DO they believe that their subtleties
and refinements entered at all into the con.
temptation OF men who spoke only in ordina-
ry language TO make their great charter intel
liglble to every capacity ? If these questions
} must be answered by the court in the mega
tive, las in conscience they must) what epi.
tibet Will adequately describe the attempt Ia
ainx different meaning TO words from that
whlch they were intended to convey I con
less mat can lind none, and must therefore
r leave 1t to the indignation of every American
TO supply my deficiency.
2. The second objection taken by the court
to the application Of the amendment to the
case before us is, that il is not suit comnenc.
cd or prosecuted in court of the q States
and to establish this position, they say that
the amendment only alludes to suits which
had-heret9fore been commenced. Here is a
new instance of the RIGHTEOUSNESS for can
call 1t by no other namc) in which the court
indulge, IN lorturing the constitution to suit
4 =. A.
common Sense, where the court find any thing
In ihp nln1nnlffIInI To rn-f..,..t