Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1845-02-22
GIDEON oLMsTEAD.


Since we alluded, in Mondays paper, to the
Ohnstead case, we have seen a notice in New
York paper of the death, at the age Of ninety
years, Of GIDEON OLMsTEAD, in whose favor the
judgment Of the Supreme Court attempted to
be resisted by the State Of Pennsylvania. That
case, with the history Of which few of our readers
are acquainted, in which the supremacy of the laws
was successfully indicated against popular opinion,
operating upon the Government of the State SO as
induce it to take part against the authority Of the
Federal Judiciary, deserves to be remembered as a
lesson against permitting any supposed popular feel
ing to interfere, at any time, with the due course
of law. sa
The facts Of that case, the record Of which is pro-
badly within the reach Of very few Of out readers
are briefly as follows:
The SUPREME CouRT Of the listed S,a.es hav-
ing ordered a Mandanus to be issued in the case
of Gideon Olmstead Us. the Executors of Ritten-
house, in which the authority of law of the State
of PENNSYLVANIA had been overruled by that Court
the Legislature of that State directed the Governor
to resist the execution of the Decree taking ground
at the same time, by resolutions addressed to the
General and State Governments, that the decision
guardians of the States Rights, they cannot could
not permit an infringement of those rights by an
I unconstitutional exercise Of power in the United
: States Courts These resolutions were ordered
to be transmitted by the Governor of the State to
the Executive Of the United States, and the Cover
nor was thereby also authorized and directed !" to
correspond with the President on the subject in
controversy and to agree to such arrangements as
Z may might be in the power Of the Executive to
: make, or that Congress may might make, either
: by the appointment of commissioners or other
wise, for settling the difficulties between the two
Z Governments These resolutions, remarkably
illustrating the confused notion entertained by their
authors of the distribution Of powers in the General
Government as well as Of the relations between the
General and State Governments, were transmitted
to the then President JAMES MADISON by the then
Governor SIMON SNYDER) on the 9th of April, 1909,
in a letter couched in respectful and complimentary
terms. To this letter Mr.. MADISON replied, on the
18th Of the same month, that according to the de-
sire expressed in the resolutions, they should be
laid before Congress when next in session, but in
dicatng very decsively his own opinion Of the pro-
posed interference with the execution of the laws in
the following terms
"Considering our respective relations to the sub
| jsct of these communications, it would be rnne
cessary, if not improper, to enter into any exami
nation of some of the questions connected with it
II is sufficient, in the actual posture of the CASE &c
remark, that the Executive of the United States
is not only unauthorized to prevent the execution
of decree sanctioned by the Supreme Court Of
the United States, but is expressly enjoined, by
statute, carry into effect any such decree when
opposition may be made to it."
In the course Of time the Mandamus directed by
the Supreme Court was issued and placed in the
hands of the Marshal for the District of Pennsyl-
vania; and, on the part of the State, detachment
of Militia was ordered out to resist its execution,
and was actually stationed for time in front Of
the premises upon which it was to be carried into
effect The Marshal contrived to serve his process,
however, without the knowledge or consent of the
Commander of the detachment and then the Mill
ta--rnarched back again. And so ended the re-
sistance of the authority of the Supreme Court by
the State of Pennsylvania.