Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1850-06-22

Mr. PRATT. Certainly. want explanation
Mr. HALE. Well, sir, will give one. The difficulty
in the Senator's mind it me, is this: Whilst M
original jurisdiction Of the Supreme Court of the United ats
is fixed by the constitution the appellate jurisdiction is NOT
fixed by the constitution, but LEFT subject to regulation by
Congress- The original jurisdiction Of the Supreme Court Ia
exceedingly limited All relative to ambassadors pub
lie minister's consu and in which States parties
the only which original jurisdiction conferred on
the Supreme Court the constitution But the appellate uris-
dcton is different That is submitted directly the regua
ton of Congress- the Senator will from the following
In all the before mentioned the supreme shall
have appellate Jurisdiction both law and Fact with
exceptions and under such regulations Congress shall make
Whilst then, the original jurisdiction must remain where
the constitution fixes H. the appellate jurisdiction is expressly
left BY the constitution to be regulated by Congress
Mr. PRATT. will ask further explanation from the
Senator from New Hampshire. The words of his amend
are, Sin all cases in which said Supreme Court of the
United States would have jurisdiction said had arisen
in any of the United States Now, that not only gives appel
late jurisdiction, but according the words Of it, may give
| or attempt to give, original jurisdiction.
| Mr.. HALE Oh, no.
Mr.. PRATT. have not the amendment except in
the paper and in reference to the language Of that
desired information.
Mr. HALE. think that will be shown from the section
| to which il is proposed to be added.
Mr. WEBSTER. Will the honorable member read the
whole amendment
Mr. HALE. The amendment reads as follows
SIN all in which said Supreme Court of the United
States would have Jurisdiction if said had arisen in
OF the United States"
AMENDED as proposed that part OF the section VIII read
thus
Wrs of and appeals the final decisions
supreme court shall be allowed and be taken to the SUI
preme Court of the United States in the
under the regulations from the circuit of the
United States all in which said Supreme Court
United States would have jurisdiction said had
in any Of the United States"
Mr. WEBSTER. will say to the honorable member
from New Hampshire that have treated the Judi
caure Of the Territories the the udcature OF the
States. We give direct appeal, limited only by the
amount. and
rule applicable Territorial courts that of the District
of Columbia, and FORTH There great many questions
in which is not intended that the whole merits Of the
should before the Supreme Court among arising in
the State courts have mentioned the arising on
certificate of difference opinion between the judges the
gentleman from New Hampshire considers the subject,
think ne will see that the best way is to pursue the
taken in the District Of Columbia, grant appeal in all
involving certain limited amount.
MI. CLAY. have two words only to say upon
this subject am inclined still to think that the amendment
proper one, though yield the superior Judgment of
others. understand the object of the Senator from New
Hampshire, is to give jurisdiction by way of writ of error
and appeal from the Territorial courts to the Supreme Court
to the extent and that ony which exists in the courts Of
the United States That understand be bis amendment
In the original bill as it stands, there is limitation of the
writ Of error and appeal to certain amount Of money-one
thousand dollars. Now, let me put question
arises under the constitution, laws treaties of the
United States, that the party entitled under the act of
1885, bring before the Supreme Court for decision without
reference to the amount But, if the bill remains as it now
saHus, ne question OF that Kind before
Supreme Court of the United States, unless there an
amount Of one thousand dollars involved That is the way
understand it. and if it be So do any objection to
give the right of appeal and writ Of from the decision
the Territorial courts to extent with the
same right in the circuit of the United States.
Mr.. WEBSTER, Tin his seat) There the amount is
two thousand dollars.
Mr.. CLAY Not in the case of constitutional questions
Mr.. BERRlEN Yes; in the case of constitutional
questions The object Of the Senator from New Hampshire
as now explained to give jurisdiction by way appeal
the Supreme Court Of the United States irrespective of the
amount in controversy the which are provided for in
the twenty section of the Judicature Act Now, those
follows
"SEc. 25 .3nd belt enacted That final judgment de-
cree any suit in the Of law equity Of State
10 which decision in the suit could be had where drawn
in question the validity of treaty authority
exercised under the United States and the against
their yalidy or where is drawn in question the validity of
statute Of authority exercised under any State the
ground OF being repusnant constitution treaties
laws OF the United States and the decision is in favor of
their validity where is drawn question the
OF any clause of the constitution treaty
commission held under the United States and the decision
against the title, right privilege, exemption specially
up or claimed by either party under such clause OF the said
constitution treaty, statute, commission; may be
med and reversed affirmed in the Supreme Court of the
United States writ Of error the citation being signed
by the chief justice, judge, chancellor of the
bya justice of the Supreme Court the United States in
the same manner and under the regulations and the
complained of had been rendered or passed circuit
and the proceeding upon the reversal shall also be the
same except that the Supreme Court instead of reandng
the cause for final decson before provided their
discretion the shall have been before
proceed to final decision of the and award execution
other shall be assigned regarded ground of
reversal such aforesaid than such appears
the lace OF the record and Immediately the before
mentioned questions Of validity or construction Of the said
constitution, treaties satutes commissions, authorities in
dispute s
Those are the Well, now, what the object of
that provision in the judiciary act Of 1882 Il invest
the Supreme Court Of the United States with power decide,
on last resort upon questions spngng out Of acts done by
authority Of the United States. for this object;
enable the United States make the Interpretation Of their
laws Of their constitution Of their treaties and Of the
done under their authority that this provision the 18th
giving with regard 10 the Territorial courts The
that although by the provisions Of this bill you may bring
by appeal which has been decided in the Terri
toa above the value of 000 yet that other
those referred in this section Of the judiciary acshoudb be
transferred to the Supreme Court Of the United States by ap-
peal without regard to the amount which involved Now,
sir that object will certainly be accomplished by the
amendment introduced by the Senator from New Hampshire.
He provides by that all these shall be taken up by
appeal In the same from the circuit Of the
United States 10 the Supreme Court Of the United States.
The section which have read does apply the circuit
courts Of the United States There these questions well
as every other, are subject to limitation Of $4,000. You
cannot bring up from the circuit any that involves
question Of fact Of the constitution treaties or laws
OF the United States, act done under its authority,
unless the amount In controversy exceeds 81 000 The
suit Of the amendment will be that instead Of facilitating the
transfer from the Territorial to the Supreme Court the
number Of cases that will be brought up will be restricted
hope understood by the Senator from New Hampshire
Mr.. Hale. Will the Senator allow me moment
Mr.. bERRlEN, yielding the foor) Certainly
Mr.. HALE Does the Senator from Georgia TO soy