Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1832-10-02

tribunals oil the country, the Stale must preSdis
unless indeed Jury trial could be eluded, by the
refinement Of the court, or by some other device,
which. however, guarded as It is.by the ramParts
Of the Constitution, would, hold. be impossi-
bic. The attempt to elude, should 1t be made'
would itself be Unconstitutional; and, in turn,
would be annuled bv the sovereign voice OF tne
State. Nor would the right OF appeal to the
Supreme Court, under the Judiciary act aVai,
the General Government. Ii taken, II wouio
but end in new trial. and that IN another YER
dict, against the Government; but whether II may
be taken, would be optional with the State. Inc
Court itself has decided, that copy OF the re-
cord is requisite to review judgment OF State
Court, and, if necessary, the State would take
the precauton to prevent by proper enac'nents'
any means Of obtaining copy. Butt obtain
| ed. what would it avail against the execution OF
the penal enactments Of the State. intended to
enforce the declaration Of Notification! The
Judgment of the State Court would be Pronounc-
ed and executed before the possibility Of a rever.
sal; and executed too, without responsibility IN
CURED by any one.
Beaten before the courts, the General Govern
ment would be compelled to abandon its uncon-
stltutional pretensons, or resort to force-a re-
sort, the difficulty Il was about to say, the I'M
possibility of which. would very soon fully ma
nifest itself, should folly or madness ever make
the attempt.
| In considering this aspect Of the controversy,
| l pass over the fact, that the General Govern
meat has no right to resort to force against
State-tO cOerce sovereign member of the Unit
on-which, trust, have established beyond all
! possible doubt. Let it, however, be determined
to use force: and the difficulty would be insur.
mountable, unless, indeed, il be also determined
to set aside the constitution. and to subvert the
system to its foundations.
Against whom would it be applied? Congress
has, it is true, the right TO call forth the Militia,
! s'to execute the laws, and suppress insurrec.
tions;" but there would be no law resisted, un-
less, indeed, it be called resistance for the uries
to refuse to lind, and the courts to render judg-
| ment, in conformity to the wishes OF the General
| Government; no instruction to suppress; no
armed force to reduce; not a sword unsheathed;
not bayOnet raised; none. absolutely none, on
whom force could be used; excep, it be on the
unarmed citizens, engaged peaceably and quiet
| ", in their daily occupations,
No one would be guilty Of treason (''levying
war against the United States, adhering to their
enemies, giving them aid and comfort or any
other crime, made penal by the Constitution or
the laws of the United States
TO suppose, that force could be called in. i'm
plies, indeed, great mistake. both AS to the ma
|
versv. Ii would be legal and constitutional
contest. conflict of moral, and not physical
force-a trial Of constitutional, not military pow.
er. to be decided before the judicial tribunals Of
| the country, and not on the field Of battle. In
such contest there would be no object for force,
but those peaceful misunderstanding on which
it could be employed, but in putting down courts
and juries. and preventing the execution of Judi.
cial process. Leave these untouched, and all
the militia that could be called forth, backed 10y
a regular force OF ten times the number Of our
small, but gallant and patriotic army, could have
not the slightest effect, on the result of the con-
tr0verSy; bat, subyeIt these by an armed body,
and you subvert the very foundation Of this, our
free. constitutional, and legal system Of govern.
ment, and rear, in its place, military desput-
ism.
Feeling the force Of these difficulties. it is pro-
posed, with the view, tsuppose, Of disembarrass.
ing the operation as much as possible OF the trou
blesome interference Of courts, and juries. to
change the scene of coercion from land to water;
as If the Government could have one particle
more right TO cOercea State by water, than by
: land; but unless am greatly deceived, the diff.
Guilty on that element will not be much less, than
on the other. The jury trial, at least, the local
jury. 1.-THE trial by the vcinage) may indeed, be
C'oueu teic' out ih US pidCe Otiles anu Ho' nuCh
less formidable obstacles must be encountered.
| There can be but two modes Of coercion re.
sorted to by water; blockade, and abolition ofthe
ports OF entry OF the State. accompa MED by Den.
al enactments, authorizing seizures for entering
the waters of the State. If the former be at
tempted. there will be other parties, besides the
General Government and the State. Blockade
is beiligerent right. 1t presuppOses state of
war. and. unless there be war fwar in due form
as prescribed by the Constitution the order
for blockade would not be respected by other ma
tons, or their subjects. Their vessels would
proceed directly for the biockaded port with
certain prospects of gain, If seized under the
order Of blockade through the claim of indemni-
". against the General Government; aud, if not
bv profitable market without the exactiou of du-
ties
| The other mode. the abolition of the ports of
entry OF the State. would also have its difficult
ties. The Constitution provides that no pref.
erence shall be given by any regulation of com
merce. or revenue, to the ports of one State,
over those OF another; nor shall vessels bpund IN