Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1833-01-19

"'' the duties Of the Government De-
ms ,Se measure of its powers; aud whenever u
~ % .xerc,se power necessary anu proper !"
=" J;.charge OF the duty prescribed oy the .ou.
..,;on il violates the pubic trusts not less inc"
s"nld in transo ending ITS proper limits ~
s'.;n therefore, from the high and solemn oe'
e"1 ,,','. ,nio,ned, however painful the perform
a,n,v be-. and thereby taci,ly permit the ''S"''
|sn,h,ri,y Of the Government to De eon.e"h'
u aI n. laws obs,ru cted by single o'a'e'
VI ~ ,s;,hsr comport with It's own safety he'
.,',bts Of the great body Of the American Peo'
T. h.;,o thus shown 10 be the duty of the Elk,
- sxecute the laws by all constitutional
Us n remains 10 consider the extent Vi 'hose
,lreaJy at hts disposal ana what "'J ~ P'
,,r lurther to provide.
nv N the collectors in Snuth Carolina, the
aro,i,ons and regulations made oy 'he &c. VI
100. and also the fines, fenaltles' anu 'o''e't
,,es far their enforcement, are particularly "e'
|.,lcd and explained. II may De wen aPPfe-
h.pJed. however, that these provisions may prove
;nad.oua,e to meet such an "Pen' powerful Or
o,n,zed opposition as Is to be cohu'euceu a''e'
|Ibe first Of February next.
S,h.souently to the date Of those instructions,
al IN the passage Of the ordinance information
80 hsen received, from sources entitled 10 oe
rsI,sd ON, that, owing to the popular excitement
an. State. and the effect of the ordinance de.
J,,i,, the execution ot the revenue laws uniaw-
s,I sulIrient number of persons. IN whom con-
I'm mi.h, he placed, could not be induced To
c,,n, the office Of inspectors, to oPpasf, VIZ any
,h;,;,v Of success, the force which Will, no
,,h, ha used when al attempt Is made To re-
-. ,r..,,s and their carsoes from the custody
= ~. o(i;,ers Of the customs. and, indeed, that
: uoul,. b. impractcabls tor the collector, with
III. aid Of any number Of inspectors whom he may
\. authorized to employ, to preserve the custody
| = ,alnst such an attempt
The removal Of the custom house from Charies-
ION 10 Castle rinckney, was deemed measure
Of necessary precau.on; and though the authority
~ uiya that direction is mt questioned, u Is ne
r,r,hcless apparent that similar precaution can
n,, be observed in regard 10 the ports OF George
tnvn and Beaufort, each Of which, under the pre-
sent laws, remains port Of entry, and exposed
IN m. ob,tructions mel,taied 10 that quarter.
In considering the hest means OF avoiding or
# preventing the unprecedented obstruction to the
collection OF the revenue, and the consequences
which may ensle, it wou d appear to be proper and
necessary to enable the officers IT the custody OF
Insecure vessels aud their carsoes. which b! the
existing laws they are required TO take, until the
Iu,es 10 which they are l.ble shall be paid or Sc
cured. The mode by which it is coEtempated
10 deprive them Of tina, custody is the process OF
yepIe,ia. aud that of capias IN EHhe'hdn IN Inc
nature Of a distress irom the State tribunals or.
gansed by the ordinance.
Against the proceeding in the nature oi DIS
,ress. il is not pc cei,ed that the Collector can
in,erpose any resistance whatever, and against
the process Of repleyin authorised by ;he law OF
the state. he, having no clan0n law power, eau
only oppose such inspectors as heis by statue au'
thorised, and NAV find it practicable to pluy; ;
and these, irnm the information already adverted
TO, are shown 10 be who'll, inadequate.
The respect which that process deserves, must
therefore be considered.
n the authorities of South Carolina had not
Ubs,ructed the legitimate action Of the courts OF
the United States, or If they had permitted the
State tribunals % al Minister the law according 20
their oath under the Constitution aud the resula-
lions Of the Laws OF the Uniun, the General Gov
rrnnent might here have been content TO took to
them Tor maintaining The custody and TO encouItsr
the 0ther Inconvenience arising out ct the recent
proceedings. Even in that case, however, the
process OF rcplevin from the courts Of Ike State
would be irregular and unauthorized. 1t has
been decided by the Supreme Court Of the Uni
tel States that the courts of the United States
have exclusive Jurisdiction of all seizures made
on land ar water, tor breach OF the laws Of the
United States, and any Intervention Of State
authority, which, b, taking the thing seized out
of the hands oi the United States officer, might
Ob>tuct The exercise Of the jurisdiction, is un-
Va tai: that IN such case the court at the United
States. having cognizauce OF the seizure, NAV
enforce redelnery OF the thing by attachment
or other summary process; tina, the question IN
der such a Seizure, whether a forfeiture has been
actually mcarrcd, belongs exclusively to the
courts OF the United States and it depends on
the final decree, whether the seizure is to he
judged wrongful and without probable cause and
whether the party can proceed at common law for
damages m the State cuu Is.
But, by making it " unlawful, for any If the
constituted authorities, whether of the United
States or of the Stateto enforce the laws for the
payment Of duties, and declaring that all judicial
proceedings which shalt be hereafter had IN afir-
nance Of the contracts made with purpose to Sc.
cure the duties impos, by the SAID acts. are,
aud shall he held utterly null and vold,' she has