Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1822-01-22


mute.-They skulked from these: interrosa
tories.-We asked them:
Does he or does he not hold that the SUI.
preine court alone possesses ultimately the a,,-
thoriiy at deciding on the consttu,ionaty o
any act OF Congress ?"
That the state legislatures are not the t,ro.
per tribunals 10 determine the CONSTITUTIONAL
~ "f the laws of the general government
ihat " the duty Of such decision is properly
anu exclusively confided to the judicial de-
| partnient ?'
Does he hold in other words, that the
Judicial dcpar;D,rnt of the L. States is +" the
sole exposiior ofthe constitution in the last re-
sort'-or, :" that in case ola deliberate, pal
pab!e and dangerous exercise of powers not
granted by the constitution, the states, who
are parties thereto, have not the right 10 utter
pose Tor arresiins the progress Of the evil, and
Tor maintaining within their respective limits
the authorities, rights and liberties apperian-
ing to them ~
we ask them To answer these questions
" yes or no "'-"W pause for reply"
The Editors of the Intelligcncer. however,
have made desperate effort to clear them.
serves from the charge of apostacy from
Republican principles" And how do they
prove it {? BY hunting upa law of the Sd Of
March, IN the year 1915, I" Farther 10 provide
Tor the collection OF duties on imports and
tonnage" The 9th section enacts " not that
the supreme court, which is SD odiuus To the
Enquirer, but that any circuit court of the l.
states may take from any circuit court mot
rom court OF the last rcsort,) the jurisdiction
over cases OF prosecutions, civil or criminal.
though the state be party, and that IL shall be
me duty % the state court, thercupon Instantly
to dismiss the case" they parade this src-
Ton IN triumph, along with an extract from
the Journal ofthe House of Representatives
ihey argue from the ayes and noes that all
the Republicans in the House, except three,
voted IN favor of the bi and erery one Of tie
fedcratists roted against it - and ,!ien exclan
Is John w. Eppes an apostate Is james
Pieasants? Is VIM. Mccoy ? Is John Smith
Is John Roane? Is Aylett HIVES Is John
kerr-an apostate ? Are all these gentlemen
apostates ?"
Is the lntelligencer serious in urging this sort
et argument? Who ever charged lis Editors
with apostacy upon this groulda Not we ;
Tor tins is point, upon which we have never
passed any opinion, nor have the tribunals os
the country pronounced any decision.-We
snaii soon see upon what grounds we hare
charged the intrlllgcnccr.-A few words,
however, upon this act of 1918.
And first, they seem to be prornundly ig
norant that this is not Il new provision in our
laws. Have they read the lannon's judicial act
OF 10 Do they really not know thM the
act ot 1915 is hut a reiteraiion of the existing
PROVISIONS of the act of '89? Some uaris of
inns 9Th section are copied uerbutim-from the
i2th section Of this Judicial acl-;,n act, which
was not then well considered, and has been
convicted by the supreme. court itself of I'M
constitutonality See Marblwy rs Madison.
III the second place, the iuieiligencer mis-
represents the provisions of this erv section
itScii-DoeS the 9th section say that fI,r cause
| IS to be carried from the state courts 10 the
circuit couts " though The state be pariy 90
What sort OF alllsion does it make to a states
being party? None but it leaves that
question, TO be tested by the constiiuti IN it
self.
In the Sd place, did Messrs. Eppes and Roape
ana Goodwynpass uprn the constitutionaIity of
TINS law, at the time they voted forit Did not
this question pass entirely sub s.lent,o pre-
cisely as the act of 80 did !? Il was not this
question which was then made but another
winch grew out of views OF expediency. As
we are advised, Vermont had been greatly a.
verse to the war, and some her citizens had
traded with the enemy on her frontiers. in de
nance OF the embargo laws, SC The icde-
RAJ officers who enforced il we're sucd i'm the
state courts,ahd her annual Judges, leaning too
much to the British feeling, were snpposc,l to
he partial hence was supposed 10 arise the
necessity otthis measure. Party spirit still
ran high all the federaIists voted against the
Jaw, aud almost all the republicans for it; hut
uiiuer these circumstances Congress did not
enter upon abstract enquiries is the InteIIi-
gencer then prepared to say That Eppcs and
f!easants had ever made up their minds up
on the constitulonaliiy of this law Was
| Tie point made before them ? Have they Sc
iIousiy examined and decided it Are even
| IA /y1rf.s Of Is,.i,
iidIty, until the point has been argued. weighed
and Seridtim decided This principle (, so
notorious, as touching the virtues Of prece-
dents, that we are astonshed it should have
Dren overlooked by any one who calls him
seifa logician.
But tins fourth consideration presents Itself
we suspect the point has never been positive
" decided any where in our courts. In the
famous case of Hunter and Martin. in the
Court of Appeals Of irginia, where the SUI
premacy of the federal court was so s,out,y
resisted, this point was not determincd-
Two ofthe four judges were silent upon it,
A third (Jndgc Roane) says
AS plaintiffs, they have elected their jurisdiction
and there is Hardship in their bein. c1n,nrled 70
abide 10y II and even in the few cases IN which tlloy
may lie defendants here, this election is al, Ntcn
ed to them, Ivy the I2ih of the iucial az,
me eontitntionoiy IF phich, horerer Ito MT nep,
10 enquire iyfo.'
Judge CabclI is the only Judge, who passes
any opinion upon it:
. The right olthe pitjHtiF TO have his case tried
before the federal courts IS unquesrinnaI,c. as he
may institute his suit n the State Fedora; Counts
IL his own option aud il will be sufficient for the
deie1t sued in stale court, ifthc act of Congress
shall give him the power remove the case NJ any
time before judgment INTO tie Federal Cnutts
cannot doubi llH,t Congress may give li. power
consistently with the constitution, Tor utheTws Use the
Judicial power uf the United States might bc cluI-
cd AZ the pleasure of amy Plaintiff"
In this stage of the question then. ere il is
vet dfridpd whilst we r,uu,f cos. $40 h, A., q