Vandalia Whig and Illinois intelligencer. [volume] (Vandalia, Ill.) 1832-183?, 1833-02-06

I
ment in the state, and The effect of the ordinance
declaring the execution Of the revenue laws
unlawful, sufficient number of persons in
whom confidence might be placed, could not
pc induced to accept the office of inspectors
to oppose with any probability of success, the
! force which will no doubt be used when an at
! tempt is made to remove vessels and carpces
from the custody Of the officers Of the customs
and indeed that it would be in1prac,icabIc for
the collector, with the aid of any number of in
spectors whom he may be authorized to employ,
topreservethe custody ageinstsueh an attempts
! The removal Of the custom house from,
Charleston 10 castle PinckneY, was deemed a
measure OF necessary precauiion; and though
the authority to give that direction is not ques-
Toned, it is, neverihe!ess, apparent, that sim
liar piecantion cannot be observed, in regard
to the ports Of Georgetown and Beaufort, each
| Of which, under the present laws, remains a
port Of entry, and exposed to the instructions
meditated in that quarter
In considering the best means Of avoiding or
OF preventing the apPrehended obstruction 10
the collection OF the revenue and the conse~
quences which may ensue, it would appear to
he proper and necessary to enable the officers
| ct The customs to preserve the custody of yes.
seis and their cargoes, which, by the existing
laws they are required TO take until the duties
to which they are liable shall be paid or secur-
ed. The mode by which eo.to..-,4c.,sxf 10
deprive them Of that custody, is the process OF
repievin and that of capias in nuhernam, ia
the nature of a distress from the state tribunals
organized by the ordinance
Against the proceeding in thcs nature nf q
distress, it is not perceived that the collector
can in!erpose any resistance whatever; and
against the process of repleyln authorized by
tho law oftI LIN,
power, can only oppose such inspectors as he is
by statute authorized, and may find it practi-
cable, 10 employ; and these from the ipforma-
ton already adyerted to are shewn to be wholly
inadequate. The respect which that process
deserves must therefore be considered
Ii the authorities of South Carolina had not
oostrncted the legitimate action of the courts
CT the United States, or If they had permitted
the state tribunals to administer the law ac-
cording to their oath under the constitution. and
the regulations Of the laws of the Union, the
general government might have been content
TO lock to them Tor maintaining the custody.
and to encounter the other inconvepiences ari
sing out of the recent proceedings. Even IN
that case, however, the process Of replevin from
the courts of the state would be Irregular and
unauthorized. 1t has been decided hv tie s,,-
prcme court of the United States, that the courts
OF the United States have exclusive iurisdic-
ton OF all seizures made on land or water fora
breach of the laws of the United States. and
any intervention OF state authority, which. nv
taking the thing seized out of the hands of thu,
United States officer, might obstr,ct the exer
else OF this jurisdiction, is unlawful: that ia
such case the court of the United States bayin.
cognIzance Of the seizure, may enforce a re-.
delivery of the thing by attachment or o,hcr
summary process; ihat the question under such
a seizure whether forfeiture has been actuollv
incurred belongs exclusively to the courts Of
the United States, and it depends on the final
decree whether the seizure is TO lie deemed
righitnl or tortious; and that moi until the sci
zure be finally judged wrongful and without
probable cause by the courts Of the u States
can the party proceed at common law for dam
ages in The state courts.
But by making it "unlawful for any of the
constituted authorities, whether of the United
States or OF the state, TO enforce the laws for
the payment OF duties, and declaring that all
judicial proceedings which shall be hereafter
had IN atlirmance of contracts made with pur
pose to secure the duties imposed by the said
acts, are and shall be held utterly null and
void" she has in effect abrogated the judicial
tribunals within her limits in this respect-has
virtually denied the United States access 10
me courts established by their own laws, and
declared it unlawful for the judges to discharge
those duties which they are. sworn to perform
In lieu OF these, she has substituted those state
tribunals already adverted to; the Judges here
OF are not merely forbidden to allow an appeal
or permit copy of their record, but are pre-
viously sworn to disregard the laws of the u