Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-04-20

the Supreme Court with the exercise OF this restraining
power. In their hands il would not be restrdtnfgi
would be an absorbing power.
MIR. President, this epithct OF supremacy, which Is
SO increasingly applied that Court is calculated 10
uniihkng Its supremacy is entirely relative, and
imports only that appellate and corrective jurisdiction,
which ii may exercise over the Subordinate Courts OF
the Ge'erdl q comment To appellate court OF eve
State is just as supreme is, and in the way,
aud for the same reasons 1t is supreme i'm rete-
rcnco to the other Departments of the Gov ernnen
has il supremacy in reference the States; and
the gentleman will have it, that this Supreme Court,
which derives its title of supremacy from its control
the proceedings of inferior judicial tribunals shall
control and restrain the Supreme Court of the States
and the atcs themselves. That the mere nodicum OF
judicial power, which they are permitted by the States
exercise shall be exered 10 control them in the
else OF their sovereign power.
Sir, deny that il the intention of the States, in
the formation of the Constitution, to invest that tribunal
with the power OF doing political whatever. The
power accorded 10 that Court was purely indicted, and
was Intended TO be So III it had been intended that
they should exercise the political power, which
asserted for hcn its exercise would have been subject
ed TO checks respon sibility Ii
reasonably supposed that after subiectng the exercise
of political power hy all the other unctionories of tho
Government, 10 iudicous and wcll-devised checksit
intended to bcc all the unchecked and ire
sponsiblc power of this Court; but upon this point,
have given my opinions in previous part oil my argu
mcnt. L must, however, be permitted 10 say, that
the Judges in the States, well as in the Gem
era Government, in reference to the exercise
tions dangerously irresponsible. The independence
oil the Judiciary has in my opinion, been greatly mis-
conceived Sir, the true independence OF the Judges
consists IN their depeieace and responsibility
the people. The surest exemption from dependence
upon any, is an dependence upon all In free Govern
ments, have moth NJ more Stable than the will
OF the people. To be Independent of that is TO rebel
against the principles of free Government. 1t is de-
pendcncc upon, and conscious responsibility the will
Of the people, that will best the Judge from To-
cal partial and personal influences. But what prin-
cple should those who administer the laws be less
sponsibc 10 the people, than those who make them?
The laws operate as they are expounded not they
ade. 1t is in the exposition of them that they
operate oPprcssivcy, and all responsibility is TO
against oppression; but there be OPPRESSION
scarcely any, without the consent of the Judges The
Judges are irresponsible, and the people every
where oppressed But hold il to be universally true
that all power which may be irespansibIy exercised
will be exercised oppressively 1t has Always been So
railways will be so for public fnnctonaries, but
men.
But TO return 10 the Judges of tho Supreme Court
They are authorized to take jurisdiction of all
IN law and equity, arising under the Constitution, laws
OF Congress, and treatcs &c and that Constitution
gethor with the treaties and the laws of Congress- mad,
pursuant To ii, 10 be the supreme law OF land
This their power and this the character and force of
the Constitution, laws of Congress, and treaties Now,
suppose there shall exist between of the States
dispute as TO territorial boundary and the Congress shall
pass law, giving the disputed territory of the
eonlenns states; and suppose the Judges shall affirm
tho validity of this law Mus; the State whose terrific
ry has been thus invaded and taken from by Congress
submit TO the decision, incur the guilt of rebellion! IL
that TO be the practical operation OF the genemans doc
trine: suppose the territorial boundary of any of
the States, shall be altered by treaty, and portion of
its territory ranferred 10 foreign power and the Su-
IT,
'uonal must the State, thus dsmembered, acquiesce
or, by resisting, be denounced a rebel; and would
the gentleman assert, that this operation merely i'm
posing salutary restraint upon State sovereignty
Now sir, deny that the TO declare law OF Con-
gress, of any of the States, UNCONSTITUTIONAL was
conferred intended 10 be conferred upon the u
dietary OF any of the States, of the General Govern
men az diTCct substantive pOtrer The exercise of
this power is incidental 10 the exercise of the mere iu
dical power, which conferred. The val dity of
law involved by case, may be incidentally decided, in
deciding the law and justice of the But the de-
cison must be made with eye 10 the law and Justice
oil me case, and not in reference TO the just unjust,
exercise OF the legislative power which exerted in
making the law. Not i'll the view to check OIL or
restrain the legislative power 1t must be given i'm the
exercise of merely jtiisal and not of political power.
thus exercising its urisdict'on, The Court would
mani the respect AMI confidence Of the PeopIe az a
Judicial tribunal. But when it merge. its appropriate
judicial, in on assumed charac,er-when il exchanges
it, ernne for the woossck and the mace, and asserts
' right to impose restraints the sovereignty of
the States, II should he treated usurper aud driven
back by hr States within is appropriate judicial sphere
1t IL due from the Safes TO their selfre=pec and
the Jnt rights of their citizens, 10 ASSERT that they
conn etent 'odecide upon question INVOLVING their
o"n sovereignty; and that TO negsgentto maintain il,
would be 10 rrnounce the character in which they formed
the constitutional compsc Of Union. That the main
enance OF its ow sovereignty unimpscd by each of
the States, is essential to the liberty of the People and
to The preservation of the Union, and that TO sub
NIT their sovereignty to the control of the Judiciary
would be to substitute judicial ogarchy for the free
institutions employed for self government by the People
All the purposes for which civil society nst-
ted would be defeated in the control of the States by
competent TO The emcnt of the concerns of a
State and nothing less pledged by the States i'm tho
social compact, for the protection of the people The
State cannot redeem this pledge il shall be controlled
by the Judiciary. The Judiciary will govern, and not
the States for that power that governs those who govern
governs those who governed and how State pro-
ec its citizens from lift is itself liable 10 be op-
pressed bv their oppresor So hat State Is under tho
political necessity vindicate its sovereignty from any
Sdtory restraints which the Supreme Court inay at
tempt to nhic upon it by resistance whatever means
it may
Mr.. President, for security against oppression from
abroad we look to the sovereign power Of the United
States TO be exered according TO the compact OF unon
for security against oppression from Within or domestic
oppression we look TO the sovereign power Of tho
State. Now, all sovereigns equal the sovereignty
OF the state is equal to that Of the Union: for the sove.
reigny of each is but moral person. That of the
State and that of the Union each person. and
in that respect precisely equal In physical force the
latter greatly tanscends the former hut in essential So
vcreignty they not only naturally but necessarily
equal: just Che sovereignty Of the State Of Della
is equal TO that az New York Of Russia, though the
physical power Of those soycreigntes vastly diff
crcnt
The unrestraned exercise Of the sovereign power Of
the Union Unnecessary to all the purposes Of the Union;
and is not necessary that the sovereign power of
the State should 10 unrestrancd, all domestic pur
poses; and any reason be assigned why the latter
than the former, should be restrained by The SUI
preme Court? No exist for the restraint OF
the one that does not equally apply TO the other But
in truth, the idea Of controlling sovereign State IL