Virginia advocate. [volume] (Charlottesville, Va.) 1827-1860, 1830-10-29

,nd ,h,t 49, cuon within doors
pealed, like p: oSl syiiSe given of h. sym
p"thy ana responsibility oil the representa
i've o"oy' to the conslitGspt body. Indeed
me great complaint nav is, apa,nst the re-
SUITS OIL this sympathy and responsibility il
The legislative policy Of the nation.
Wth respect I" the judicial power of Tho
~ Sa.eS, and the authority OF tho Supreme
Cout' vi relation to the boundary of juriseiic
uoh between the Fedora! and tSe State Gov.
ernments, may BE permitted To refer To the
thirty.ninth number of the Fede,oI,s, -.
Tor the iight IN which the subject WAS regard.
ca oy "s writer, at the period when the CON
shtu''on was depending; X it is believed that
me same was the Prevailing view then IN.
Ken .! u, mat the same view has contipue IN
prevail, and that IT does so at this iime M, :
withstand'ng the eminent exceptions To- IL
! but IL Is perfectly consistent with the con.
cess'on OF ms power to the supreme Court.
| ~ cases 'nihng within the course offs fin,
lions TO maintain tina. The power has mot Al.
waysb been rightly exercised To say nothing
vi the period, happily short one, when ind
! ses In Their seats did not abstain from, ipiem.
| petale aud party harangues, equally at yari.
| tnce with theft duty and their dignity
tnere nave been decisions from the bench
which have incurred serious and extensive
uisapprobation. Still it would seem. that.
wi'n OUT Few exceptions, the course of the
Judiciary has been hitherto sustained nv the
predominant sense of the nation
Those who have denied or doubted tho ON
pre.nlcy OF the judicial power OF the United
| ocates' ana denounce at the same time a null
| "yuiS power IN State, seem not TO have
| Suhcientiy adVorted TO the utter inefiiciencv
81 "a supremacy in n law of the land, without
asupre macy In the exposition and execution
y, tnc Jaw nor 10 the destruction of all e.
qu'Poise between tho Federal Government,
aDd the State Governments, if, whilst tb.
funciionaries of the Federal Governnort ,ro
directly or indirectly elected by and resnnn.
| sOie To Tue States, and the functionar,ss M,
| inc states are, IN their appoint ment and re-
spohsioiiity, wholly independent of the Uni.
| tea olates, no constitutional control of any
sort belonged to the United States over The
states. Under such an organization. il is ev.
iient that 1t would be IN the power of the
states, individually, to pass unauthorized
laws, anu u carry Them Into complete effect,
any 'h.ns III the constitution and laws of the
ohiteu states 10 the contrary notwitbstand
ing. FMS would be nullityiny nower i'm NJ
Pienary character; and whether IT had IT'S H.
ma effect through the Legislative, executive.
UT judiciary organ OF the State, would bo e..
quaiiy fatal To the constituted relation he
tween the two Governments.
Shouiu the provisions of the constitution
as mere reviewed, be found not to secure Tho
So'erhiheht ana rights Ut the States, aya,ns,
usu Pa.'"iS aid ABUSES on tho part OF the IT,
hited states, the final resort within The nur.
view vi the constitution, lies i'm an .,,,a,,J
rieht al the constitution, accordinr Ia n nro
cess applicable by tho States
h"u All tue event oil II failure of cyery c.n-
sutuliohii fssori and an ACCOUNT IatIUn OF a.
SUI i'''o"' an" muses. rendering passive o.
oea'e"cN ana hon'reslStance greater evil
IMAM 'eSStance and revolution, There can re
mann out one resort, the last oil allan aposa
from lheIcancc!led obligations of the consti-
tutionai compact. To original rights and the
law oI sell preservation. This IS tie ultima
Fdtt0 under all governments, whether con.
| sVild"lsd, conlederatCd, or Il compound of
bpih aud IT cannot be doubted Thai a single
member of the Union, in the extremity sun
posed, but III that only, would have a night,
as an extra and utra-c unconstitutional right, to
maze the appeal
This brings us TO the expedient lately ad-
vanced, which claims for single State a
rightto appeal against an exercise of power
by the Government OF the United States, de-
cided by the state 10 be unconstitutional, to
The parties 10 The constitutional compact ::
the DECISION OF the State to have the fleet
OF nuliiying the act of the Government of
the United states, unless the decision of the
Stale be reversed by three-tourtbs Of the par.
ties.
The distinguished names and high author
tics which appear 10 have asserted and given
practical scope 10 this doctrine, entitle it 10
a respect winch 1t might be difficult other
wise to feel Tor 1t.
| II The doctrine were to be understood as re-
quiiing the three.iourlhs OF the States 10
sustain, instead oi tina, proportion 10 reverse
the decision OF the appealing State, the de.
cision 10 oe without effect during the appeal
1t would be suihcicDt TO remark, that this ex-
ira constitutional Course might we'll give way
TO That marked out by the Constitutions
which authorizes two-ihirds OF the STATES tn
institute, and three tourths to effectuato. an
amendment to the Constitution, establishing
permanent rule OF the highest authority. in
place oil an Irregular precedent of coDstruc-
ton only.
But 1t Is understood that the uulifyino
doctrine imports that the decision OF the
Siote Is 10 be presumed valid and that il o.
verfues The law of the United States, unless
oVerfuled by three-fourths of the STATES
Can more be necessary to demonstrate the
inadIlssibIty OF such doctrine, than thai
II puts VI IN the power of the smallest fraction
over one-fourth OF the u. States, that is, Of
| seven States out oftwenty four, to give The
law, and even the Constitution to seventeen
States, each Of the seventeen having, as mar.
ties to The Constitution, an equal ripht with
each oil the seven, toexpouud il, and TO insist
on the exposition That the seven might in
particular instances be right, and the seven
teen wrong, Is more than possible. Bot to
establish positive and permanent rule, civ.
ing such power to such minority over
such majority, would overturn The firs
principle Of free Government, and In practice
necessarily ovesturn the Government itself
1t Is to be recollected that the Constitution
was proposed to the people of the States as a
'choft, and unanimously adopted by theState,
as n ,ohote. il being part of the Constitute,
that no less than three fourths Of the State,
should be competent to make any alteration
in what had been unanimously agreed to -
So great is the caution this point, that in
two cases where peculiar interests we're a,
stake, proportion even Of three fourths i.
'irus'ed, and unanimity required to make
| an alteration.