Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-02-03

Of tho true construction Of the amendment, tba, we
shal In conclusion, present to the House few tx-
tracts from that opinion instead Of any argument of
our own. He says the hrst impre scion made the
mind by HE amendment. IL. that II was intended for
those cases. and Tor those only Ia which some demand
against Safe 10 made by individual in the Courts
OF the Union. IL we consider tho causes to which Il
Is to be traced we are conducted TO the same concu.
sop general interest might well be felt, in !. aving
to State the full power Of consulting it's conve
the adjustment OF It's eebis, OF oher claims upon
H but interes, could be Eel, In so changing the
ia'ion between the whole and it's parts, as to strip
the Goveromen, OF tie means OF protecting, by thu
instr1m-naiity OF its courts the constitution and laws
IRON active violation. The words OF the ane nj ent
ton"
a" To commence a suit, ia to demand some hing by
The institution Of process in court Of Justice; aud TO
prosecute the suit IT, according to the common accep.
teton OF language, e. continue that demand BY a
suit commenced by an individual against State, we
should un'er-.snd process. sued out by tina! indivi-
dual against the State. for the purpose OF establish
come claim against II by the judgment of court and
the prosecution OF that suit is it's continuance What
ever may be the stages OF its progress the actor is s
The same. Suits had bsen commenced in the Suprem
Court against some OF the States before the njmen
was introduced into Congress, and others mipht he
commenccd before It should be adopted by the S ate
L"gislature., and might be depending the time of it's
adoption Tho object OF the ndnie mt was no, only
70 prevent the commencement, OF future suits, but to
arrest the prosecution Of those which might be com
menced when this artcs should form part the con
sttu:ion It, therefore, eaIbtaces both objects: An
It's meaning s that the u iioai power shall not be con-
s'roed TO extend 10 any euit which may be
or which. II already commenced, may be prose cuted
ng anst State, by the citizens Of another State If
SUIT brought in one court and carried by lie al pro.
cess to supervising court be continuation OF the
same SUIT, then This suit u not commenced prose-
eu'ed against State is clearly. in its CONNIE
ment, the suit Of State against individual which
sn is transferred to this Cour not for the purpose
asserting any claim against the State, but for tn, pur
pcs, o. asserting constitutional defence against claim
made by Safe"
Under the judiciary act. the eec, of writ of err
ror is simply bring the reco into court and sub
init the judgment Of the interior tribunal to re- cxam.
nation. IL does not in any manner act upon the
Ties II is acts only the record. II removes the
cord into the supervising tribunal Wh-re then n
State obtains judgment aiust an individual and the
Court rendering such Judgment overrules defence set
up ander the constitution or laws of the United States
the transfer OF this record into the Sspreme Court for
the cole purpose OF iDquiring whether the judgment
violates the consti luton or laws OF the States can
with no propriety, we think, he Ienoninated a suit
commenced or prosecuted AGAINST the Stat. whose
Judgments so far re.eSamned. Nothing is demanded
from the State. No claim gainst il of any de
asserted or prosecuted The party he re stor ed
to the possession Of any thing. Essentially, it is an
appeal On single point; and the defendant who
from a judgment rendered against him, /. new ,
said 10 comm prosecute suit AGAINST the plain
iii who has CHAINED the judgment. The wri, OF error
Is given rather than appeal, because II is be mara
usual mode oil removing suits at common law; and be
cause, rhaps, II is technically proper where
single point OF law, and not the whole case TO be re-
DIt an appeal might BE- given aud mi oh
be regulated as to effect every purpose wr of err
ror The mode OF removal is form, not subsancr whe
Their IL be by writ Of error appeal claim /. assert
ed no de'nSnt Is made by the orsin deli ndant he
only Asserts the constitutional right have his
examined by that ri1unal whose province /. 10 con-
s'rne the constitution and laws Of the Unou'
"The only part OF the proceeding which is in any
manner personal is the citation And what is the cits
ton! IT simply notice TO the opposite party that the
record is transferred into another court where he NAV
appear, or decline TO appear, his judgment incna
q q uarfy Win haso oh.
Judgment is out of court and may therefore, not know
mat his cause is removed, common Justice requires that
notice OF the fact should be given him; but thi. notice
Is not suit, nor has it the effect of process. II tn.
party docs not choose to appear he cannot be
into court nor is his failure 10 appear considered as
default Judgment cannot be given against him for his
non-apPearance, but the judgment TO be e-examncd
and reversed or affirmed in like as if the par
ty had appeared and argued his cause"
"The point of view in which this writ of error with
It's citation, has been considered uniformly in the court.
OF the Union, has been well illustrated by reference
to the course OF this court in suits Instituted by the IT,
nlted States. The universally received opinion is that
no suit can be commenced prosecuted against the
United Staes that the judiciary act does authorize
such suits; yet writs OF error accompanied with cita-
tons, have uniformly issued for the removal of iudg
mcnts in favor of the United States into a suDerior
court, whore they have like those in favor of an ndiy
dual been re-examined, and affirmed or reversed II
has never been suggested that such writ of error was
suit against the United States and therefore not within
the jurisdiction of the appellate COURT
ut is, then, the opinion of the Court that the dcen-
hant who removes judgment rendered against him nv
State Court into this Court, for the purpose of
mining the question whether that Judgment be in viola
ton OF the constitution laws OF the United States
State, whatever may be its opinion, where tile effect Of
the writ may be TO restore the party to the
OF thing which he demands"
All which is respectfully submitted.
JAMES BUCHANAN
VIM. w. ELLSWORTH
+ ID WHITE.