Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1831-03-09
coMMUNICATED.

Republic, and events oil portentous character are
succeeding each other in such rapid succession,
that we have only time to wonder. Personal dis
Dute and invective, dark and designing intrigue,
even the rare but unfortunate sight OF the first
characters in the Government rushing into wild
sollison,-bear no terrOrs to the mind Of the
Patriot.
But recent developments have shewn that seri-
aus oDposition is about to be made 10 the leS;ti
mate authority of the Supreme Court, tribunal
whose responsibility should he cO-extensive with
il, usefulness. The State of Georgia, with a
strange arrogancy of power, has condemned the
process of the Court; and although the citation
should have wrought out respite tor the unhap-
py criminal, the sentence OF the Court below was
carried Into effect. with strange precipitancy. lin
violation Of everv principle OF humanity. of the
precept of the Court, and in defiance Of the Con-
stituton.
1t has been said that the Supreme Court wishes
20 ,nterpOse its high power, and thus Interfere
with the criminal jurisdiction of the State. Nhe-
Their it has the right so to do, is not 4 question
bearing at all upon the present issue, although 1t
would not be difficult TO establish. from the most
approved authors on Government, that where
two or more parties are about to contract or
league themselves together tor mutual advantage,
II is necessary to Weld up certain immunites,
which, in their individual capacity as sovereisns,
they were entitled to; which immunties to
We welded for the public service, and for the
welfare of all concerned. But how does it ap-
pear in the case Of Tasssls? lie appealed to the
Supreme Court, and the case might lave been
speedily decided on the writ OF error. 1t might
have been contended, on behalf of the Indian.
that an existing treaty with the Government
would prevent the State of Georgia from eXercIs
inc upon him its criminal jurisdiction 1t must
have been determined by the Supreme Court, Ell
Their that the State of Georgia had jurisdiction or
had not. I'm the former case, the State might
have proceeded to Judgment iorthwith; and in
the latter, il can scarcely be possible that any
man or set Of men would be willing TO break a
solemn treaty, which was ratified by Federal
power. and backed by national faith and honor.
If the State. then, had the III int to execute the
sentence of her Court upon this Indian, It would
have been hut an act of courtesy to have awaited
the decision in the Supreme Tribunal OF the coun-
try. The delay would have been Of little mo-
melr-small. indeed, when weighed in the ba-
lance with Justice and humanity.
Again: The State of New York, through her
Attorney General denies the right of the Su-
irene Court to demand or compel her appear
ance. a. defendant. in case in which the State
of New Jersey is plaintiff. The Attorney Gene
raj of the State of New York, in his letter to the
Chief Justice Of the United States, saws: Il beg
leave respectfully to say. that the opinion is en-
tprtained on the part Of the State of New York,
that this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction IN
such a case, without the authority OF an act OF
Congress for carrying into execution that part OF
the judicial power which extends to controver-
sizes between two or more States" BY reference
to the Constitution. it will be perceived. in the
ist section of the Sd article, that the words
troversies between two or more States" are eX-
pressIy used. The judicial power shall extend
to all cases in law and equity arising under the
Constitution, and TO controversies between two
or more States" Again, 1t is said IN the same
article. that in all cases in which State shall
be party, the Supreme Court shall have orgi-
nal jurisdiction" Can any thing be plainer!-
Who shall decide between two sovereign States,
if the Supreme Court is Invested of the power?
The Attorney General wishes an act of Congress
passed. by which the Court may exercise its ju-
risdiction over the State! The effect of this
would be to render the Supreme Court subservi
ent to Congress assembled: whereas 1t is totally
independent of any power whatever, so long as
n performs it's duties. and does not transcend its
constitutional powers. An act of Congress upon
this point would be altogether imperative, as to
tbe process of the Court the exercise of its le
Ultimate powers in legitimate limits. and so long
as it is borne out by the letter as well as the spirit
of the Constitution.
If l am asked what guarantee the State Sover-
eighties will have that the high and noble trust
committed to the Judges of the Supreme Court
will be faithfully executed answer, IN their
oaths to support the Constitution; IN the intei!i-
sence and clearness of minds expanded by every
branch of political and legal science. and govern
ed withal by sound discretion; in their patriot
ism. which has earned for them the high seats
which they occupy: and in those invariable rules
which concentrated wisdom prescrlbes to con-
ceatrated power.
The DEGREES of the Court must be executed.
although, in the performance OF duty, physical
force should be resorted to, and the destruction
of the resisting party should be the result Per-
sonal as well as political safety require it. The
Executive, Judiciary, and Legislative parts of the
Eaxernment should be as indenendrnt os each