Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1825-01-14


the Supreme Court, in relation TO the state of
Massachusetts. His wish was to avoid all col
ldng jurisdictions-and, therefore, it was, that
he Wished the bill modified in the manner he
had stated. And he now suggested, with that
view, that the bill should be made to read as ap-
plying to offences committed son the high seas
and beyond the territorial jurisdiction of any Of
the statcs;" or any other ptraseOloSy which would
attain the same object. (iIc believed the lam
guagc in the former law ''out of the iuris-
diction of any particular stately He trusted
that the honorable member from AIassachu> cts
would not object to such modification.
Mr., WEBSTER rose in rcply-He sail that the
member from Virginia had stated with great fair
ness the difficulty which attended this subject-and
| if hc apprclcnded, with that honora BILE member,
that any disagrceablc collision would take place
between the Federal and State authorities from
the passage of the hill il stands, he mig,t per-
haps DC induced, to modify it as proposed. lie was
well aware that the leading law heretofore existing
on this subject, provided for the punishment OF
crimes committed ION the high seas, or in any bav,
l'ar'or basin, creek, or river, out Of the urisdc
Of any particular statc; but he had expressly
stated when he introduced the present bill, that its
Object was TO carry that farther, and he would
now asst ign scn'c ot the reasons which led him ,o
desire 1t: The power to pum:-i was one for which
no government ncw-a-tiays was. much disposed to
! contcnd-ard the Offences committed within tie
against the United States, against those inter-
cStS which the Government was cspeciallv bound
to protect. The jii sdicton of the United States
was fpurd chiefly where commerce existed, and
commerce was an interest which the United States
were peculiarly bound ~ protcct-it is interest
regulated by the United States-ts revenue is
given To the United Statcs--and the bill proposes
to give the Federal Courts jurisdiction over crimes
only where they now have jurisdiction eyer COM
mcicc. The crimes most mischicvous were crimes
against tho property of The Government. Now the
question was, whether the General Government
shall dcvolve the whole burden (foI it was bur-
den and not privilege Of furnishing crimes against
Itself on the State Governments, because committed
WITHIN their bounds. In taking this task into its
own hands, the Government will only be acting on
inc principle which has governed it from its origin
offences against those rights which are peculiarly
committed To its protection it has ALWAYS punished
IN Its own Counts, such as counterietiug the nati-
ohtl conn., t"tsng the national securities, &c. There
was nothing to prevent the State Government from
Furnishing these offences we'll as others within
ineit liuiis; yet the Federal Government has never
Ieit IT 10 them The great objection against leav-
ing the task Of furnishing to the State Governments
is the burden of expense; no State Government. so
iar as ms knowledge extended, was ever verv
anxious To take this hurden--none Mere very am
ntl"us al extending their jurisdiction III this res
pect. tie would now state. so far as his UNDER
standing at II went how the power of Furnishing
these crimes came to the General Government In
defining the power of Congress, the Constitution
says IT shall extend to the defining auu furnishing
ct praces and Ieonies upon the high seas, and of
lchces against the law of nations. Whether the
Constitution Uses the ''high seas in its strictly
technical sense, or III enlarged is not
material. The Constitution throughout in dist,i-
putinS legislative power, has reference its Judi
cial exercise, and so, i'll distributing judicial power
mas respect to the Legislative. Congress may pro-
woe, by law, Tor the punishment; buI it cannot
Nnt- IL, ,,I..
extend to all cases of maritime jurisdictions; and it
has lately been argued that, as soon as judicial
system is organzer it had maritime jurisdiction at
once, by the Constitution, without any law TO that
eliect-but do not agree to this 0octrine-and
am very sure that such has been the practice of
our Government from its origin in I19:, till now
HE constitution defines what sia II be tic objects
oil judicial power, and it estab shes only Supreme
tourt-but III the subordinate Courts the uristic-
non they shall exercise must be defined by Com
gress the defining of it is essential to the creation
OF those Courts. The judicial power is indeed
SFdied by the Constitution, but it is not, and can
not he erercised till Congress establishes the Counts
by winch 1t Is to be exercised And | hold there is
sun reSidlum OF Judicial power, which has been
granted by the Constitution, and is not vet exer-
ciSsd, VIZ: foi the punishment of crime enmittcd
within the admiralty jurisdiction q. me United
States Courts, and yrt not without the jurisdiction
OF the particular states. So the Constitution SAYS
mat the Federal Courts shall have jurisdiction of
all civil cases between citizens of different states
ana yet the law restricts this jurisdiction in many
reSpects-as to the annInt sued for, Sc. There is
d mass OF power entrusted to Congress; but Com
gress mas granted X all 20 specific courts and
therefore thc Courts do not exercise it. The Con
Sutution gives to Congress Legislative power in all
cases OF admiralty jurisdiction, from whence has
occurred one OF The most extraordinary Of ali cir
1u"StanccS that causes Of revenue have become
cases OF admiralty jurisdiction. The cause of this
IT, under no hoe
were tried by Judge Of the Crown; in England
tley are not held To be of admiralty iurisdic-
tIou; but are tried by JuTies in the Court of Exchc
qner. The act of 1890 gives to the District Court
oil the United States original cognizances of all
cases OF admiralty jurisdiction, including cases of
seizure; hence that very state of things has ham
pened, against which, when we were colonies, we
were petilionng the mother country for hundred
years, (whch seems TO show that the real grievance
was not the trial of these causes without a iury.
out oy d Judge appointed abroad and without our
cohScht.) MI w said that, Notwithstanding the
objection urged against the bill it would be found
mat the law now existing has provided for the
Jufsdlc0n the bill proposes that is, for the punish
| incnt OF crimes committed within the maritime u-
flSdlction OF the United States, and at the same
time within the jurisdiction Of the states The act
oil IfgO II 1T had stopped the words "iligh seas"
would indeed, have excluded such jurisdiction as
that now proposed-but il does not stop there: il
says also, "and in all bays, harbors, creeks &c
Many things are directed to be punished in the act
oil lIJU, on the high seas, which are neither Mira
cics nor feonies, although the Constitution, speak,
ing OF the judicial power, restricts pracies and
fcl"nes, which would infer that the Constitution
was theh held to grant larger power by the other
clause Several other laws, besides that of 1900,
give express authority for tie extent Of jurisdiction
~ tins bill. Mr. w here advertcd to the act of
May, 1920, in which il is decided that admiralty
jurisdiction extends far as the tide Gibbs and
flows Mr. w. concluded his remarks (of which