Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1838-12-10

grave constitutional questions which had b,., IL.
cussed ~ete, therefore. excluded from III. dac,s,
OF Inc case the court. indeed, expressly admittu,
',l'', Win powers and dutes pioperl, belonging /,
The Executive, no other department can ip,c,1,,e n,
| the writ of mandamus and the question ,h.,efo,s
resolved Itself into this Has Congress eonle,,ed nm.
on the Circuit court OF this District the powr, to
sue such wit 10 an officer OF the General Govern.
'nen commanding hint perform ministerial ac,
majority Of The court have decided tn,t !, has bpi
have founded their decision upan of reason,
ing which, IN my Judgment renders further eeisl>
I'VE provision indispensable TO the public interests
ana the equal administration Of justice.
IL has long since been decided by the Supreme
Couf ia hehef that tribunal nor the cir. uii
OF Tie L States held within the respective STATES
possess the power h question but Is now held that
thls power denied 10 both of these Ing tribunals to
The i"tnef by lie Constitution and to the Latter by
Congress, las been. by It's legislation, vested M the
circuit count OF this District. No such direct grant
OF power 10 the oncuit court OF this District claim
ed but II has been held TO result by necessary impI
cation, from several sections OF the law establishing
the coult. One Of these sections decltes that the
laws OF Maryland as they existed the time OF the
ccsson. should be force that part of the D,sric,
coded by that State; and by tins provision the co,u
mon law. IN civil aud criminal cases as II prevailed
IN Maryland IN 1901, was established in thai part Of
the DISTRICT.
In England, the Court of Kings Bench-because
the sovereign, who, according the theory of the
Constitution Is the lonnai" Of justice, originally sat
there IN person, and Is s deemed Ia be present. In
construction OF law-dloue Possesses the high power
OF issuing the wit OF mandanus not only TO inferior
Jurisdictions aud corporations but also magistrates
aud others, commanding them, IN the kLg's name
10 do what then duty requires in cases where there
IS 4 vested night, and 10 other specific remedy. 1t
la, been held, III the ieeu.d to, that as the
Supreme Court OF the United States is, by the Con
stl:u'on, rendered incompetent exercise this pow
e. and as Tie circuit couit OF tins District is court
OF general jurisdiction IN cases at common law, and
the highest OF org nal jurisdiction in the Dis
met the right 10 issue tie writ of manamus in
cident to lis common law powers. Another ground
relied upon To MAINTAIN the power in question, is
that wasincade by fair CONSTRUCTORS N the pow
er II granted to the crcuu courts OF the L. States,
ny the act" TO provide Tor the organ
izatlon OF the courts of the United States" passed
18Th OF February, 1901 that the act estab shug tue
circuit court Of the District passed the 9Th day of
February, 1901, conferred upon that count and the
judges thereofthe same powers were by law vest
ed IN the circuit courts oil the United States and IN
the Judges of the said cuus that the repeal OF the
first mentioned act, which took place III the next
did not dlvest the circuit court Of this District
OF the authority in dispute, but lett it still clothed
with the powers over the subj which, it's conced
ed, were taken away from the circuit of the
United States by the repeal OF the act Of 3th Feblua
~ lS0l.
Admitting that the adoption of the Laws of Mary
land portion OF ms DlStfict COniefS the
cult count thereof, N that portion, the endant
extra judicial prerogatve powers OF the Court Of
Kings Bench, in England that either Of the acts
OF Congress by necessary implication, authorize the
former court to issue wit OF mandamus off
Ger Of the United States, To compel him 10 perform
ministerial duty. the consequences arc in one re
spcct, the The result IN either case is, that
the officers olhe United States stationed in difc-
parts OF the United States, are in respect TO the
performance OF their official duties, subject to dil-
erent Laws and different supervision; those in the
States one rule. aud those in the District Of CO.
lumhia to another and very different In the
Distinct their official conduct is subject judicial
control, hom winch In the States they are exempt.
Whatever difference OF opinion may exist to
The eXIodeucy Of vesting such a rover in the
judiciary, in system OF Government constituted
like thai OF the Uuled States. all agree that
these dsparagine discrepancies in the law and III the
admInisttat on Of justice ought not 10 be permitted
to continue and as Congress alone provide the
remedy, The subj ct is uuayodably presented your
consideration. NJ. VAN buren,.
WAsHINGTos, December 3, 1888.