Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-03-29

ifthere be a wrong done to person or property within The
diction OF that matter. BY what authority does the Con.
gress OF the u. States limit that Jurisdiction! What sha-
dow OF constitutional provision is there TO sanction this
most flagrant usurpaiion? True, such a violation of the
law OF the State may sometimes be justified, as being done
IN execution OF a constitutional law Of the United States;
but this Ia a matter Of defence, aud TO be tried as every
other defence is to be tried, aud can have no other eE.
iect IN busting the jurisdiction, or in giving TO the Courts
OF the United States original jurisdiction of offence. against
the State laws. So any person is authorized TO bring suit
IN the Courts Of the United States for any injury TO
person or %prc?erty, Tor or on account Of any act done
III execution OF the revenue laws. The constitution eiyes
TO The Courts OF the United States jurisdiction of all cases
in law ond Equity arising under the Constitution and
tdtcs IF the United States. An assault on the person or
tte.pass to property Is a violation OF the laws of the State.
Can II make a difference that a violation of the State law
was provoked by an act done under colour of executing
the law OF the United States! The protection Of persons
and property has heretofore been supposed the province of
the States. In assuming TO itself this new function, the
7 cderai Government indicates most clearly its tendency
to engross all power and control all State authority.
Iii plain, likewise, from the various provisions of the
act, that such suits are intended to be allowed against per-
sous acting IN execution OF the process OF the State Courts.
Judgments oil those Courts are declared 10 be void. and
persons and property exempted from their jurisdiction.
IL is no, only our law, but par, Of the law of the civil.
med world, that tho Judgment OF a Court of cornpcicnt
jurisdiction is valid until II be reversed by a competent
authority. Thcjudgment of a Superior Court of general
jurisdiction, can never be void for want of i1risdic-
uon' When there are courts OF concurrent jurisdic-
non, mat which obtains possession of the cause is en-
Titled TO retain II; its process must be respected, and all
other Jurisdiction is excluded. 1t is true that the iudg.
ments of courts Of limited jurisdiction, land such are Tie
courts OF the United States, and so they themselves have
deterinined) are void, il the jurisdiction be transcribed.
ms distinction would seem TO determine whether sove-
reignty is to be attributed to the State or TO the Federal
authority. Hitherto, it has never occurred TO any one TO
doubt that an officer, acting in execution of the process, of
a court OF general jurisdiction, and all persons acting un-
ucr ms direction, are exempted from all responsibility for
mat act. lie is bound, under the highest sanction, 10 ex-
ecutc that process; aud shall he be punished for perform.
ing his duty?
Ill his act ycrc subfnittc1 IN tho cptir, ;., A..
OF the criminal Justice of the State might be INTERRUPTED.
and 1t Is not too much 10 say, that the State governments
would he rendered impracticable. The worst criminal
one stained with the guilt Of murdcr-upon making an
affidavit, which no such criminal would hesitate TO make
aud procuring a certificate, which any criminal might ca.
silly procure, would be able 10 clude the criminal Justice
OF the State. His cause must be removed TO the Federal
Court, and when upon his trial il shall appear that his act
was not done in execution Of tho law OF The United States,
your committee do not perceive what other consequence
can follow, than that he must be acquitted and 20 will,
impunity.
Having taken this view of the provisions of the act in
question, the committee would submit TO the solemn con.
slderation and determination of this Convention, whether
they 10 no, effect an entire change in the character Of our
Consultations, and will not, when carried into practice, abo-
fish every vestige Of liberty, and render this an absolute.
consolidated Government, without limitation of powers
IL has been truly said, that i. these things may be done, the
most solemn acts of the highest authorities of the State
may be regarded as the unauthorized proceedings of ind.
vduaIS the courts Of justice may be shut up the lie.
sls'a'ufe dispersed, as a lawless mob, aud we, ourselves,
representing, as we vainly believe, the sovercing,y of the
Slate, called TO answer for what we have said and done on
this floor, at the bar OF a Circuit Court of the United States.
Is this an exaggerated picture Let us examine il a III.
tie more closely. If these provisions NAV be made 10 en-.
force the execution of the revenue laws of the United
States, they may be made to enforce any other act which
Congress shall think proper 10 pass. No matter how OBJ
pressive, how clearly unconstitutional, there is no power
IN the constituted authorities OF the State TO resist il. If
one class Of cases may be removed from the jurisdiction OF
the state Courts, any other class, subject only TO the dis
erection OF Congress, may be like wise removed. If the pro.
cess oil the courts be void, and the officer executing il, and
those acting under his direction, responsible ciyilIy or mn.
nlsnaDIe crlmlnailV, the Judge who directed the nroce.e
must be answerable in like manner. He was equally
without authority, and having commanded the ACT "a
partsker OF the guilt. The Legislature who commanded
the act OF the Judge, and the Convention of the people. in
obedience TO whose mandate every thing was done. must
have the same participation. IL the Sheriff and his posse.
oOstrncung the execution OF the Revenue Laws, may
constitute that unlawful combination and assemblage. on
being notified of which, the President is authorized to
use the military force OF the United States 10 di.perse
them, then the Courts, the Legislature or the Conven.
ton, in obedience TO whose authority alone the Sheriff
acts, and who are the efficient causes of the obstruction.
are assemblages OF a similar character, and NAV be dis.
persed by military force. The whole purpose of the act is
TO confound the acts OF the constituted authorities of the
State, however solemn and well considered, with the law.
less and irregular acts of individuals or mobs. The GER
tain effect oft must be, TO restrain The States from the ex-
ercise of any other authority than such as Congress, or the
sectional majority represented in Congress shall think fl
TO permit them TO exercise, and 10 ensure the enforcement
oil every law which that majority may think proper TO en-.
act. 1t involves the cruelty and absurdity of making the
community responsible 10 hostile force for It's acts as a COM
munity, and the individuals OF the ommunity punishable
for their acts in obedience to the laws of their Govern.
meh'; an obedience from which they cannot exempt them
selves, unless they absolve themselves from their allegi-
ance by self. punishment.
That the object oil many of the politicians who support-
ed thIs bill tie politicians OF that majority in whose
hands all power will be- is 10 establi-h a consolidated go
vernment, is now hardly or at all disguised. The chime.
ra OF a government partly consolidated, partly federative,
is now scarcely commended for. The same class OF poIiti-
clans have always had in view the same object. IL was
attempted 10 be effected in the Convention which framed
the Constitution OF the United States The atempt was
there ioiled. After the formation of the government, those
who Affected consolidation, assumed the term stFederat"
and denied that the opinions held by them, led to that re-
SUIT The possession OF power, however developed their
VIE wi and the first marked indication OF their disposition
to engross the powers Of the States and NEEDLE with their
internal concerns was afforded by the alien and sedition
laws This attempt was 20 strongly rebuked BY public
opinion, which led 10 the change OF administration in $500,
that the hopes OF consolidation seemed abandoned forever.
hey remained dormant until revived by the aei.ations
springing out OF our late projecting system. II was per-
ceivtd that nothing less strong han a consolidated govern.
meni could sustain that systemOf uity.-GTad we
have been told that the States have parted with a por ion
OF their sovereignty: then, that they were never sovereign;
Cntil at length, ayailing themselves OF the excitement of
particular crisis, and passion fer power, and tho influence
OF an individual, the act before us has been passed, sweep
inE away every yes'igc OF State sover cignty and reserved
rights, or causing them 10 be held at The mercy of the ma
jority, compared TO which The alien and soditioR laws sink
into measures harmless and insignificant.
And what is it 70 tho Southern States, 10 be subjected t.
n consolidated government? These States constitute a mi
Doriiy, and are likely 10 do so forever. They differ in in
sututions and modes OF industry from the States oil the ma
joriiy, and have different and in some degree incompatible
interests. IL is to be governed, not with reference 10 their
own interests, or according to their own habits and feel
ings, but with reference 10 The interests, and according to
the p%rsjudices OF their rulers, the majority. 1t has been
truly said, that the protecting system constitutes but a
small part of our controversy, with the Federal Govern.
ment. Unless we can obtain the recognition of some eC
tectuai constitutional check OIL the usurpSiion Of power.