Litchfield enquirer., 1833-01-31

~ 10 Tie Collectors of Saii ChroIina se ,rors;ons
aud regulations made by TIE act Of 1850 ana also the
ines peuaifiee and forfeiuFes for their enforcemen
are particularly detailed aud explained. ID NAV be
well ap,welended, however, that these uroyisiops NAV
prove Inadequate meet such an open, powerful orr
eanized Opposition, as is 70 be commented after the
Subsequently 80 The date Of these instructions and
TO the passage Of the Ordinance information has been
received from sources entitled 10 be relied on that
owing the popular excitement 10 the state aud the
effect Of The Ordinance, declaring the execution of the
revenue laws anlawfai sufficient number Of persons
in whom confidence might he placed, could not he In
dwced TO accept the Office OF Inspectors 10 oDpoee
with any probability Of success, the force which will
no S,ubt be used wheB an attempt is made 10 remove
vessels and cargoes from the cstody Of the officers Of
the Customs and indeed that il wonld be impractical.
bic for the Collector, with the aid OF any number Of
Inspectors whom he may be authorized t. employ to
preserve the custody against such an attempt.
The re muval of HE Custom House from 6rharleson
Il, (,ase Pnck new was dee med measure OF neces.
sary nrecaulion; and though the authority give that
direction is questioned Il s nevertheless apparent,
thai similar IrecaniiOn cannot he observed in regard
10 The norris 81 Georgetown aud Ben,,tort earR OF
which, under the present laws, remains port Of en-
try and exposed to the distractions medate in that
quarter.
venting the unprecedented obstruction Ihe collection
Of the revenue, and the consequences which may
se il wouE appear lie proper and necessary en-
able the officers Of the customs IN preserve the cuso.
DIV of vessels and their cargoes, which by The existing
laws they are required to take, until The duties 10
which they are liable shall be paid secured. The
mode by which it is contemplated 10 deprive them Of
that custody the process &c replevn, and that of
;as in icheynan, in the nature of distress from the
State tribunals, organized by the ordinance.
Against The pro ccedng in the nature Of distress il
il no, perceived that the Collector inerpo4e any
ressiance Whatever aud against the process o re
pleyn authorised by the law Of the Stae he, having
no common law power. can only oppose such inspec-
tcabe 10 employ and these from the information al
ready advortcd TO shown 20 be wholly inadequate.
The respect which that process deserves must there
fore be considered.
ed the legitimate action Of the Courts OF the United
States or ifthey had permitted the State tribunals
administer the law according to their oath under the
Consultation, and lhe regulations os the laws OF the
Union the General Government might have been con-
tent to look them for maintaining the custody, and
10 encounter the other Inconvenience arising of
the recent proceedings. Esen ln that case. however,
the process Of repeyn from The Courts Of the State
would lie irregular All d authorized 1t has been de-
cided y the Supreme Court Of the United States that
the Courts Of the United States have exclusive ns-
diction of all seizures made land water for
breach Of the laws of the United States; and any in
terventon of State authority which by taking the
thing sezed out Of the hands Of the United States of
fcer might obsiruct the exercise q tins jurisdiction. Is
unlawful, that in such case the Court OF the United
States having eognzance Of the seizure may enforce
redeliyery the thing by attachment or other sum
mary process; shat the question under such SEIZURE
whether forfeiture has been actually incurred be
longs exclusively the Courts Of the United States
and it depends the final decree whether the SEE
Is to be deemed rigMfu or torous; and that not
until the seizure be finally judged wrongful and with
probable by the Courts Of the United States
can the party proceed al common law for damages III
the State Courts.
But by making il unlawful for any ofthc constu-
ted authorities whether ofihe United States ofthe
State, enforce the laws for the payment OF dnes,
and declaring that all Judicial proceedings which shall
he hereafter had in armance OF contracts made with
purpose the duties imposed by the said acts
and shalt he held utterly null and void" she has 10
feet abrogated the judicial tribunal within her limits
in this respect has virtually denied the United states
the established by their own laws, ana
declared il unlawfnl for the Judges 10 discharge those
duties which they are sworn to perform In lieu oil
These she has substituted those State
adverted to,the judges whereof are not merely Tor
hidden 10 allow appeal permit copy Of their re-
cord, but are previously sworn Disregard the laws
Of the Union and enforce those only Of South Caroli-
and thus deprived ofthe function essential to the
judicial character inqurng into The validity Of the
law and the right OF the matter, become mercy minis
era instruments in aid Of the concerted obstruction
Manner die process nor the authority ofthcse tribu
nails thus constituted, be respected consistently
viii, The supremacy of,he laws or me rights and nd aeca
tecion due from The Government to ITS ofcers and cat
izens il withheld. and there is end not on-
" TO the laws, but to The Union itself.
Against such force ms the sheriff may, and which I
y the repevn act Of South Carolina il 10 his duty, 10
exercise, i! caanot be expected that collector can
retain his custody With the aid of the Inspectors In
suits In the United States Courts against those eIga-
ged in the unlawful proceeding the property might
be seized for violation of the revenue laws, md be-
ing lbeed in the proper courts, an order might be
made for s delivery, which would be committed TO
lie Marshal for execution. But in that case the 4th
section Of the act, in broad ana unqualified terms,
makes Il the duty Of the Sheriff "under any process,
order decreee other preiext contrary to the true
intent and meaning Of the Ordinance aforesaid" Ii ia
thus made the duty o. the Sheriff 10 oppose the pro-
Of the Courts Ofthe United States, and for that
purpose, IL need be, to employ the whole powers of
the country; md the expressly reserves to him all
power. which independently Of its provisions, he could
have used. In this reservation il obviously cOntem-
plates rcsort 10 other than those particular
" mentioned.
1t is not to be disguised that the power
which It is thus enjoinsd upon the Sheriff to |
employ il nothing less than the posse com;tG-
fus. 10 all the rigor nf the ancient commOnlaw.|
This power, though it may be used against IN
lawful resistance 70 Judicial process, is in its
character forcible, and analogous to that cum
ferrednponthe Marshal, ~ the act of l795. tits
ia fact the embodyihg ofthe mass Of popula- !
tion under the command Of single individu- I
al, TO accomplish by their iorcible aid what
could not be effected peaceably and by the |
ordinary means. II may properly be said TO
be relict OF those ages In which the laws
could be defended rather by physical than !
by moral force. and, 10 its origin. was cOnler-
red upon the Sheriffs Of England to enable !
them TO defend their country against any of
the Kings enemies when they come into the J
land. AZ well as for the purposes of executing
! HrNn .sas