Richmond Indiana palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1837-1839, 1838-12-15

the decision: and any additional inforn,a ton
which you may desire will I've supplied by the
proper department. No interference in the par
tIcuar cause IS anticipated. The money has
been paid; the claims of the prosecutors have
been satisfied; and the whole subject, SO far as
they are concerned, is finally disposed Of, but it
Is on the superstition that the may be regard
ed as an authoritative exposition of the law it
now stands. that have thought it necessary
present it to you: consideration.
Inc object of the application to the circuit
court was TO compel the Postmaster General to
carry INTO effect an award made by the solicitor
OF the Treasury, under n special act of Congress
tor the settlement of certain claims of the REALTORS
which the Postmaster General declined to exc
cute IN full, until he should receive further leg
isative direction On the subject. Ii the duty i'm
posed on the Postmaster General, by that law,
was to be regarded one of official nature,
belong ing to his Office branch of the Execu-
tive, then II IS obvious that the constitutional
competency of the judiciary to direct and control
hun IN his discharge, was necessarily drawn in
question. And if the duty imposed on the
Postmaster General was TO be considered a mere
! ly ministerial, and not executive, it yet remain
ed to be shown that the circuit court Of this Dis
trict had authority TO interfere by mandamus-
surh a pow or having never before been asserted
or claimed by that court.
/ With view to the settlement of these impor-
tant questions, the augment of the circu. court
was carried, by a writ OF error, 10 the Supreme
I
tribunal the duty imposed upon the Postmaster
General was not official executive duty. but
one of a merely ministerial nature. The grave
constitutional questions which had been Disc 'ssed
were, therefore, excluded from the decision Of the
cas- the court, indeed, expressly admitting that,
with powers and duties properly belonging to the
Executive, no other department can interfere by
the writ of mandamus: and the question, therefore,
resolved itself into this; Has Congress conferred
upon the circuit court Of this District the power
"a r Al
Government, comma nding him to perform a min
! isterial act? ma jorty of the court have deci-
ded that it has, but nave founded their decision
! upon process of reasoning which, in my judg-
men'. renders further legislative provision indis-
pcnsable to the public interests and the equal ad-
ministraiion of Justice.
! 1t has long since been decided by the Supreme
Court, that neither that tribunal the circuit
courts of the United States held within tho res
pcctivc States, possess the power in question; but
It Is now held that this power, denied to both of
these high tribunals, to the former by the consti-
tuon, and the latter by Congress,) has been bv
its legislation, vested in the circuit Of this
District. No such direct grant of power to the
circuit court o. this District is claimed but il has
been held to result, by necessary implications
from several sections of the law establishing the
court One Of these sections declares, thet the
laws OF Maryland, they existed at the time oil
the cession, should be in force in that part of the
District coded by that State and, by this provis
t ion, the common law, in civil and criminal cases
8 it prevailed in MARYLAND in 1901, was esta
: blished in that part of the District.
: In England, the Court OF Kings Bench-be
cause the Sovereign, who, according to the theory
of the constitution, the fountain Of iusiic ,ori
s.nry sat there N person and Is s!! asfwssde
d the high power Of issuing the writ of mandamus
not only to inferior Jurisdictions and corporations
c but also to mag isirates and others, commandin!
# them, in the Kings name, to do what their dut
fhopo &c, TOD r,rb,
II and no other specific remedy. 1t has been held
n in the referred to, that, the Supreme Cour
'r of the United States Is, by the constitution,
r dered incompetent to exercise this power; and a
the circuit court of this District a Of gen
n era jurisdiction in cases at common law, and the
9. highest court of original jurisdiction in the Dis
Of trict, the right to ISSUE the writ of mandamus
incident to its common law powers.
d Another ground relied upon TO maintain tn
J. ROVER in question, is, that it included, bv fai
l. construction IN the power ii granted 10 the circu
courts of the United States by the "to provid
for the more convenient organization ofthe court
IS of the United States, passed 18th day of Febru
Of airy, 1901; that the act establishing the circui
court Of this District, passed tho 9Th day Of Fea
l. ruary, 1901, conferred upon that court and In
Is Judges thereof the same powers as were by liz,
e vested in the circuit courts of the United State
t. and III the Judges of the said courts; that the re
r peal OF the aforementioned act, which took pac
y in the year, did divest the circuit cour
e, OF this District of the authority in dispute, bu
It. left it still clothed with the powers over the sui
;e ject which, it is conceded were taken away fror
the circuit courts of the United States bv the re
of peal Of the act Of the 18th February, 1901.
TO Admitting that the abortion Of the laws of Ma
IN ryand for portion of this District confers on tn
of circuit court thereof in that portion, the tran
I'd sendent raiudiciai prerogativc powers of tn
lie Court of Kings Bench,in England, or that ethe
rs of the acts OF Congress, by necessary impcatio
IS, authorize the former to issue writ of mar
y damus to officer of the I. s., TO compel him
r. perform ministerial duty, the consequences arr
On in respect, the same. The result in ei,he
is, that the officers Of the U. S, are in re-
pect to the performance Of their official duties sui
=. ject to different laws and different supervision
en- those in the States to rule and those in III
n District of Columbia to another and a very diffe
all ent one In the District their official conduct
as subject to Judicial control, from which in tt
st States they exempt.
wv Whatever difference of opinion NAV exist as
I'd the expediency of vestng such power in the j
dietary, in a system Of Government constitute
Oh like that of the L. s., all agree that the
he disparaging discrepancies in the law and in II
he administration Of justice ought no, be PERM
re- ed to continue; and as Congress alone can pr
to vide the remedy the subject is unavoid,h,v nr