Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-04-10

| dhu'inS persons from their pursuits. ard
causing waste of much valuable time
bnt, 1t Congress Should author sc licenses
10 be issued, BY The corporation of Wash.
ing'on, Tor using them, and il this law
have an operation beyond the territorial
! limits Of the District, ilcn has Virginia
lost all power OF regulating the conducf
| OF her nwn ciiizeus.
The solution of the whole difficulty lies
IN THIS. THAT though the laws of Con-
Srcss, whea passed IN execution of Il ted
erai power, extend over The UuioB-apd
being laws OF The Uni'e, States, are par,
OF The supreme Law Of ,he laud vet, a law
passed Ike The one In question, in execu.
eion q! tie power ut municipal legislation.
extends only so far, as the pnwer under
which II WAS passed-tha, is, 10 The bonn
daries of the District; that, therefore, il
Ia no law Of the U. S., aud consequent.
" moi part OF The supreme law of the
rama. Nor is there any thing navel in Ike
idea or Two PAYERS residing in the same
boJy, nj the same time, aud ever The same
subIec', OF different kind. Tie idea is
famliariy illustrated bv cases of ardinarv
occurrence in the Judiciary tor The same
trespass, an action. or Indictment, NAV be
brought, before the same court, and a
different judgment pronounced, as one or
the other mode is pursued. SO the same
court bas ireqneGdy common law ard
ohauc.ry jurisdiction, aud prOuounces a
different judgment III relation TO the sam.
subject, ad ihoy are exercising the one or
the other jurisdiction.
lie. US look further al The consequences
OF call'ug the laws Of the District laws
O. The United States BY the 9Th article
OF The constitution, laws of the u States
made III pursuance Of Tie constitution.
are declared par, of the supreme law of
Tue idnd, aud HE JUICES in every state
sshail be bound thereby, any thing i'm the
laws oi'iheir state 10 the contrary moi.
wi'bslandiug. II, then, laws OF the Dis
'tict lac laws OF the United States, within
lac meaning of The constitution, il will
follow that they tuay be carried 10 The
extent al an Interference wild every de-
parineut OF state legislation aud when.
ever they shall 40 interfere, ihey are 10
ba considered OF paramount authority
VIII state case illustrative oil INV idea
uoon this subject: Suppose the law of
Virginia ID declare a deed for land void
against purchaser for valuable conside-
fatian, without notice, uUiess recorded
upon the pariy's ackuow ment. or The
evidence Of three Witnesses: Suppose a
saw OF The district 10 dispense With re-
cotdd!ion al all, or 10 be satisfied with,
'so witnesses. II enc citizen sbouli
convey 10 another citizen OF the district
sabd lying Ia Virginia. iii conformity with
The dis'ncl law; upoU the principle uog
cohtchdsd tpI, TIE party Wus, recover,
IN the teeth ot tie law of Virginia. Ii
viii be admitted, that law passed like
The Que 10 question, by Que slate, might
be repealed by another: II will also be-
admi'ted, that IL CnDgrs-s had, (as some
think hey bave ,ight 10 dp, hut in
winch DO not cnUcUr,) esiGb ilshed here
local Legislature, Which had ,pa.Srd The
law IN question, its effects might have
beea repel!rd from the states by penal
SANCTIONS.
But, IL ia said. that as the dominion
over The District, flows from the same
source with every other po@er, possessed
by The government OF The Union, as il il
executed by The same Congress, as ii was
creates fCr tie common good and for uni.
Versa' proposes, that il must be Of equal
obhgaiIon throughout the Union in lis
effects, with any power known 10 ibe
constitution; ir0uI whence il IL infer
red, tho. lie law in question can
encounter M geographical impefimeuis,
bun iiat lis march is through the u
nioD. The answer il, thai The Frde-
raj powers Of Congress ~ their execution.
encounter no geographical imprdimenis,
because no iIhiils, sbori Of The bounda-
RES oil The Coion,are prescribed 10 them
pu', tf" legislative power over the dis
irici, IN lis execution, does eucDun~
Ter geographical Impedimeilis, because
rue imiiS q! lie dI-tfici are distinctly
prescribed, as the bound Of It's extent.
aad as au nsuIm0untable barrier 10 lis
further Eaarch.
II Is said mo, that This case bears no
| resemblance 10 fGal o! one state repelllng
| by pcnsi sRnciIons, The effects of The
laws Of another; because ii ia said, one
stale 10 no party 10 the lAss Of another
eberras AeTe, lie law is lis own law, as
eeIDs represented IN Congress, and there
~ contributing TO Ils passage. aud capa.
be 10 part or eiieciiDg its repeal. II will
Ia seen al OUce, that tbs orineipie would
prove TOO puch, aud ,Eeseiofe lIlst IT,
cannot be a sound one Tor. IL TIE states
4 are 30 scqniesoe III iais assignee because
they are represented 10 Congress aud
! have therefore ap agency in asking and
4, reHeahnE lass, the sBiDe reasoning would
Justify Congress ~ legisisi;Gg beyond
| inrlT delegated powers; for example pre-
| scHDiJg general cOurSe OF descenls. 1t
| ~ oDyl0ns, that they might contribute ~
| pnca 10 The passage and repeal Ci this
law, ~ any other, aud yea This ground
will DOT be attempted 10 be sustained. re
then Hey aye uoi bound, because OF
their representation III Congress, to ac~
q"lesce IN The assumption of power
not grated hey are surely - little
bound, upon tl,ai ground, 10 permit
power, c0nfiGed 10 ten miles square, 10
co-extend lis operation with The limits Of
the United States.
! 1t. then, have succeeded in shelving
That the law in question, ia not 4 law o.
ibr Ouiied States 10 ibe srHse Of HAT en- d.