Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1825-03-11

established during the time of his predecessor
anu mat tins furnishes precedent for the pres
eht act. On examination, this precedent will
operate against and not for t,c present measure.
Inc cunrts then repealed were district courts,
and were emphatica!ly. ''such inferior courts as
congress by the letter of the constitution mrht
from time TO time ord:lin and cstabIisl,n and the
repeating was similar IN all respects to the act OF
our own legislature which abolished the district
and quarter session courts of this country IL
Is true that those who opposed that repeating
measure IN Congress, endeavorcd to prove that
tneSe district courts, were, after their creation
on HE same footing with the supreme court aud
could not therefore be repealed or abolished
Tins argument was repealed 10y the advocates of
mat measure, by showing the difference between
The supreme court and those which were to be
repealed, and they admitted that the abolition of
thc supreme court was not in the power of Con-
gross. We will quote one or two instances of
snch admissions General jackson, a Senator
from Georgia, in that debate, after reading the
article OF the constitution which erected the ju-
dietary and which is like ourown saws: ..fiere
there are two tribunals. First, the supreme
court, the creature ofthe constitutto,a-the crea-
f"re O the people: the inferior jurisdictions the
crenf're ot the legislature. And notwitEstand-
ing the play ofgentemcn upon the words shall
ADD may they arc in meaning essentially differ
ent. The world 'sltnLp applied to the supreme
word may applied TO the inferior courts is dis
cretionary, and leaves the legislature voliton
to act or no! Us it sees fit. Again; WHY are the
peculiar and exclusive powers of the supreme
court designated in the following section of the
constitution, but because the consti ution con-
s'dered that tribunal as absolutely established;
while 1t viewed the infer ior tribunals as iepen-
dent on the will of the legislaturcn To the same
purport is the language of MIR. Mason from Vr-
fho
ton using this language says, a supreme court
snail he established, are we not justified in con-
siderng 1t as of constitutional creation? And
on the other hand, from the language applied to
inferior courts, are we not equally justified in
considering their establishment, as dependent
upon the legislature, who may from time to time
ordam them as the public good requires
On TINS point there is great force m the remarks
of the gentleman from Georgia, that among the
enumerated powers given 10 Congress, while
there Is no mention made OF the supreme court,
the power Of establishing inferior courts, is ex-
pressiy given. Why this difference, but that the
supreme court was considered by the trainers of
the constitution as esta bshed by the constitution
NvhIie thcy considered tho inferior courts * do
pendent on the will of the legislature See
Deb: on Jud. 81 and 80.
Not 10 detain YOU longer, we iorbear further
qnota,;1ns from tat memorable debate The
two gentlemen from whom we have quoted were
both advocates for the repeal of the system un-
der consideration None of those who voted
with them pretended power to repeal the Su-
preme court. and their opponents, commended
against the power of repeating either the SUI
prcme or inferior courts. So that this crece-
dent IS with us, and The arguments quoted are APP
plicable TO our purpose.
Some strength might be gathered in support
OF our positions from the wise reasons and mo-
tives which governed the trainers of the consti-
tuition, when they erected the supreme court,
and left Inferior courts to be raised or demolisli-
ed by the legislature. If the convenience and
of society may require the frequent
new modelling of the inferior courts, while such
ncccss tr cannot apply TO the supreme court
If the inferior conrts should follow their creators
too implicitly they would be controlled bv the
supreme court, while the supreme court placed
by the constitution in more elevated and indie
pendent station, might operate as a check upon
the whole. We say check, notwithstanding the
modern theories, of supreme legislation, AID tue
maxim that makes the legislature the people, or
that which declares that they, like the King OF
Great Britain, can do no wrong. We aclSnow
ledge that we still adopt the language Of t776,
and the doctrines of the Washington school,
Which declared that the different departments
of government ought to be set as natural checks
upon each other, and that in the doctrine of
checks, the judiciary ought TO bear considera-
BILE share.
We might multiply arguments in support of
our side of the subject. But forbear, and
conclude by declaring solemn conviction
that the act of the Legislature in question, has
attempted TO abolish that Appellate court which
the people created that il has attempted to undo,
and to do in another manner what the people in
convention assembled, had unalterably fixed
that ii has attempted to wrest the Appellate-ju-
dicial power of the state from those with whom
Of tn people have lodged it, and to vest tin lands
others who clrn II constituGonally either rec i've
or exercise it--and is therefore uncoDsttuG nal
aud void. Under such Crcumstanceswe doubt
not that we hold still the same Offices Judges
OF the Supreme Appellate Court Of this state,
which we received from the people, through the
fundamentally of their constitutional agents,
and that the appellate Judicial power co extern
siye with the state, as vested by the constitution,
still remains with us. Influenced by this con-
yiction VIC have, according TO our adjournment
Notwithstanding this act has passed during a re-
cess of the court, appeared and resumed our
seats, not being disposed to abandon them at
the legislative mandate. unless it had reached
us as the result Of an impeachment or under the
constitutional form of removal by address, But
in such an unparalleled state of things, although
we do not surrender our powers, we have CON
cluded, after resutniDg our official station to ad-
iourn the court for the present, and thus to re
fer this important issue, made up not SO n'uCu