Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-09-25

A
the inferior members of the bar who rs gcncr;,l!y
exclaimed, (troin interested moyrspo doubt :: - il YOU
WIZ enlarge their jurisdiction, yuu must likewise
large Their capacities. AS lift required greater ca
paciiy 90 decide, in ordinary ca between man and
man, uron the Justice equity Ola claim of Que n-
tdred dollars, than for one hundred cents The
principles oil law the which govern all Eases
whether Tor the amount of one cent, thousand
dollars: and when the right appeal il secured it is
snihciemt check against the OF the court below
The plea therefore of n want OF capacity in oNy iuSti-
ces, Is a RANK libel on Virginia, anG never will be
urged 10y any other than norrow minded lawyers i-
terrsted IN continuance Of the present system.
What, shall Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
| yenioni Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois or
the most oil those states produce justices capable of
deciding correctly or satisfactorily least to the
PEOPLE oil those states, all the OF
| one hundred dollars, and Virginia he uoring! God
forbid the dishonorsble conclusion But if it is re-
ally the case--thcn let take advantage Of their
per excellence, and import one or two thousand s-
uces better qualified than to discharge the
duties contemplated by the proposed improve ments
-lhe next number will contain remarks the
| cfectire fio',cl,ise. NESTOR
NEW OR OLD PAR2r-AGAIN!
1t IL impossible To grasp the slippery cell
We attempted to bring the National Intelligen-
Ger to Il plain issue. We put certain plain
questions to which we asked him to give a ca
tegorical answer.-We asked him, whether
the supreme court alone possesses ultimate
y the authority of deciding on the constt,l-
| uonality of any act of Congress. asked,
whether " in case of a deliberate, palpable and
| dangerous exercise of powers not granted by
demonstration, the states have not the riSht
| to 'ntcrpose for arresting the progress of the
evil" &c. &c.-ln vain THE lntelligencer
VIII not answer, age or no. He still skulks
from the question at issue. He declares that he
VIII not " be- drawn into war of legal disqu-
stlon y that he will not be "tempted into the
arena J. that he will not afford us 4" even the
little advantage we would calmly an easy VIC
tory over" him-that he will not set his " wits
to work to draw distinctions where there is no
difference" &C. Sc
The Intelligencer has for once, a. least.
shown somel title wit. We commend his
discretion more than his vaour-not that we
should think ourselves equal TO cope with this
national giant ; but in such cause, even we
would not be afraid To try it, though armed
| only with stone and sling.
lie avoids all sort of precision in laying
down his propositions. Press him hard, and
ne immediately flies TO general terms. He
excuses himself by saying he has no turn for
"legal disquisition. Instead of answering, for
| instance, the plain questions we put, in plain
way, what does he now say? That {" it is but
within few years that such thing was ever
| imagined, as that decisions Of the state courts
were OF equal authority, on questions arising
| under the constitution or laws of the u. States.
with decisions of the U. States Judiciary."-
| Again he says that, there is a pervading err
| ror in the doctrines which would reduce the
general government TO dependence on the
pleasure of the state governments for the excr-
else OF lis constitutional authority or for the
interpretation of that authority''-In the Sd
place, he says, that sin the Convention of
VTsinla,e even, the supremacy fthe federal Judi
cary an ats OiCn sphere was not questioned"
But take these general propositions, and ask
the lntelllSencer how far he means to carry
them oh he will say, he has no turn for legal
dlsqusitions." Ask him, what is to br done,
when the general government departs from
:" Its constitutional authorty"-the federal Jul
dietary flies from I" its own sphere'-when the
states are unconstitutionally dragged to the fe-
deral bar under some act Congress and we
are immediately put off with the modest ex-
euse that they have no turn for legal disqui-
sition. Ask him, for instance, whether. the
states were bound, hand and foot, by the alien
and sedition laws ask him, whether i'm those
cases the state legislatures have right to in
terpOse for arresting the progress of the evil ::
ask him whether he will turn his back upon
the noble. resolutions Of Kentucky and Vir-
gnia, in 1913 ;and he will repeat as usual, 81 oh I!
we have no taste for legal disquisitions." Ask
|
| general government, which violate to its inju-
ny, such rights as are guaranteed TO it by the
federal compact--and he modestly eyades any
| answer.
rms subtlety, however, must not avail him.
| Though he has thus wrapt himself up in
general propositions, yet his bearings are too
strongly marked by the few arguments he has
yentured to put forth These arguments (if
they deserve that name,) point well enough
10 the doctrines we have reprObated; and
which the federalists of '98 distinctly upheld.
Hesays, in the 1st place, that {" the avowed
object (of tile present constitution was to es-
tabilsh a government independent of the state
governments, for all national purposes. The
constitution was not framed by the states, but
by zoe the people of the U. States, that is, OF
the country or territory so designated. fit
was to be'a government Qfhe states, why was
not the II. OF X. SO constituted as to vote by
states, instead of being a representation of the
people numerically ? The truth is, that even
the Senators of the u. States being made eli
gible by the state legislatures, was dn accden-
tai arrangement introduced to obvate the diff
iiculty Establishing different mode of choos-
ing the Senatorial Now, what are the
facts Was the constitution adopted by ma
Ijorty of the States, or of the people ? The
states, certainly the Federalst II. IA saws,
that the scvefi first states which agreed to il
being a majority of the then states, did not CON
tain one third of the people of the Union, so
that majority Of the states were minority
the Union and that even adding N. York
and Connecticut Ito make nine, the number o
states necessary TO its adopton) the people in
them all would be still less than majority
Who can now change this constitution? The
states -5-4ths ofthem,n not ofthe peope.--Oftht
very machinery, necessary to its operation
the states are component part. Delaware
small as she is, has as many votes in the Sc