Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1822-04-19

, y
et iia,, itaey state violate these provisions
Of tie constitutions, lay establishing form OF 90 vern-
mrnt anti. republican and monurchicai, or lv LAYING
sad, duly IS should evidently amount to import
AMI item OF resen;ir and materially affect tho COM
me,ce of The other staes, Congress could adopt no
ether menus tn Correct these and usuipaiions
ian those heonsins to foreign states such rs ne
gotiaa1,n, renonsifancc, md war Could not Con-
gress pass such laws as might he necessary and pro-
per- and enable the judiciary of the United States 10
carry them into effect, in order to cure and prevent
these evils ir MOI, then the guarantee contained in
the constitution, the right of revision and control
over election laws, inspection laws, AM, over state
Legislation upon many n'her subjects that NIGH he
mentioned, Is n dead letter, or may mean any thing
n' every thing That fancy or sophisiry may dictate;
and the constitution of the United Satcs has erected
no government NJ all, hut merely n league more
,mpoent than our old confederation a treaty ui al
lance hetwecn separate and independent states and
should any olfhe parties violate It's sulations there
can he no civil or legal correction nv the ordinary
orms OF INV. Any state in this union may coin n.i-
''y, rgose deorec'fc paper feeui tender in the 1su,-
ns'a ~ dehS PASS bin, of aainsier or r most Ecio
bios; and :he people of the United States may he
e'ianded OF their property, or condemned to death
"nder laws expressly tormilen hy thar constitution
whici Is declared and admitted 10 he the supremc
Rw oil tie l1n Conclusions like these we can no.
ver ADMIT, so long as the constitution contains ne ye
are confident Il does, ample provision for its own ex.
roS'i"n and enforcement, hy The ordinary means of
legislative ami Judicial adjudication Whether the
'"rohs provided are the hest that he found, or
whether the eSpoSiiions given lave always been cor
'eci or nat ~ not now The question But, that the
authorities or ascnis Of the general government re-
quarry atpomfpdto execute the Powers couveyed by
.ne constitution must he the prurer persons 10 de-
'l''e hn"iiy upon the extent OF those powers m
pears To us, according the principles of our Ameri-
can eonsf''"''on To lac just and necessary conclu-
H"n u" cnn-iifiiiun II rle United States is the
supreme law at The land Congress shall have
'"wrr 10 pas. All laws ihai may he necessary and pro-
.' Tor cafrvn" into execution the powers contained
la The constitution that Isl they shall have the pow.
OT tln l.,-
al The 'in'l The judicial power shall extend 10 all
eases ~ law aud equity, arising under this constitu
"' g. Is mere MOI here the most positive proyi-
Srn i"' 'he construction of the constitution by the
neplfimens %! the general government, according 10
NE n''"'e o., the cases that may arise under the con-
sti'"',"n lie first congress that met under this
constitution, composed Of MANY of the ablcsi men who
i,d assisted IN framing and adopting it. were so con-
h'em' mat The power OF final construction had heen
VeS'e III the departments of the general government
MAJ they passed the judicial act The o5ih seton nj
whrh (ih'"'y so niicli criticised and con,lemncdA
provides the means of bringing these questions M,
~ 'icr where they may have originated, before the
j"'ic" power al the United States in order 10 pre-
serve uniformity and correctness in deciding and ex
e'uing tho supreme law of iha land
we will now proceed 10 examine, us conciseIy as
we can, a few "i The objections most frequently urged
"eain>i our conclusion. IL is said that the Deonle
"rthe unhed States have delegated Ia the general
government limited powers only hut that if the
agents appon'cdto administer that government bc
vested with the power of dec idins upoH the extent of
'i'h n"i,ip!y and enlarge The powers ofIhe govern
men, and render il altogether unlimited
we nave already observed that il is essential To
every Tree government, that its powers .houll be H.
H''eu. An examination Of the Tin of rights, am!
constitutions, OF all the states of union
M me Tine oil The adoption Of the federal
WI, snow ihat ihrSe Stale governments were all limit
ru' hh' from tins examination, IL will lac equally ma
''iest That the agents appointed To gu the cp,r,.
mems "i administrations under these constitutions
confused me tribunals Tor deciding upon the extent
MAG M a.
are we To suppose that 'he people of these states
when iramrng government which was 10 he common
10 'he'n all IN order Ia form a more peper uniou
rS''"'sh p'siice &c ithed the power Of construc-
"o", wh regard la this government u,lon ,liffcreu
rr"rpirs from those which they had inoraIicd ;a,6
:ui Their state governments We cannot perceiy.
!" ', me provisions OF the constitution, thing 10
justly tiiS sppoSiiIuu and The anomalous prucinIe
tan each party To the compact has deserved tn b,,,
sen Tie 'iSit oil deciding upon Ike extent of The nssy
'H conveyed ny II, cannot he mlmc,l, unless it he
ala'ent upon the face ui the constitution itself The
'"iSsi"n thai the nsris of the genrral government
~ me conH!:iniiohnl Judges Of the extent of uower
,'FH''' 10 maj government, can no render il
'"'n'ied tim The nn;lesaile existence Of The same
P lhcpie III the STATE governments can render them
unlimited Should il he SAIL that The limitations of
me S'e governments different from those impos-
~ ~" '"c "c"ei;ii government, we reply, that the
uhilrrrnce IL in degree and not in princiule The
H'rc's 81 co2n'zancc and control as>s ned 10 then,
respectively may he different but the means bv
winch they are 10 lac confined 10 their proper subjects
have been provided aud regulated upon the same
principles.
Bul IL j. said that, nv allowing the rigbt or con
s"iIun To belong the departments Of The gene, raj
government, The judicial department, not being anne
n'D'e 10 me people through The elective franchise
orcomcS dangerous and alan ming, and must prove f
H'I 10 our liberties. This, lift be t;ue NAV be u
good reason for making the judiciary more directly
responsible 10 The people but IL does prove that
I've constitution has not vested them with the mowers
oil construction which they have heretofore 81 erc;s
cd and nuchiess does approve that we ought 10 he
angry with The particular persons who now hammer
10 occupy thhi important department. lfihey occupy
s''ioh 100 lar removed from responsibility 10 The
eape, II isa!e people who have prescribed t,ei, no
sI!'on, and they alter whenever they think urn
peru de So But why is Ibis power jn The federal
judiciary SO much dangerous IN The liberties ri
tie people OF the Guted States than the same mower
~ The Stale judcidries with regard To the ueopIe of
the several stNes The tenure of office. and the
on'y cause o removal, of the judiciary Of the United
otes are The same us in that state which seems ,o
be most fearful vi danger iIOm the powers exercised
by the judiciary of the o. States
IL Is moreover urged, with great carnessness that
me government OF the United States being n strictly
limited government, and the fearful ca,:tion with
winch lis powers were delegated heing APPARENT nm
on ne lace OF me cOns nuIon 1t ought be strictly
cohS'r"ei 10 tie truth oil all this, most readily
gave OH henrty assent But the question is not holr
lie constitution shall he construed but ho shall CON
srnr H. That The ju,llcI.l power of the q. States
nave the power Ia decide all questions in law and
equity arising under The constitution is most certain
hd mat mes always decide tNese correctly is
10y no me"ns equally certain. But it Us equally Gel.
liin HAT when any whatever is bIOueh before
he, they must oi necessity decide, (belore hey can
proceed to The merits of the question: whether IL has
|i''en under tie constitution, Of the United States
or not or, ~ other words, they must decide anon
'hc extent OF their own jurisdiction. If this Le an !
principle in the constitution Of judicial
system, u IS certainty not or uncommon M the
.nIcEil systems OF Ibis country and we have nc YER
nerd oi an Wuiptory hunai, distinct II ON The court
20 "'che iie previous question, whether The court
rh'c Jurlsdicton not nor did the trainers Of our
constitution nnk il necessary to provide super.ap
teIlhtc tribunal 10 winch appeals might he carried
rom Tic dec sipns oi The bgheg court Of strictly in
hcml power. ln ls view Of the subject, they had /
Inc example Of the British constitution, before their |
which the cOutl oC the t,enrt a.