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


| Mr.. HALE Well, sir will give one. The difficulty
in the Senator's mind il seems to me- is this: Whilst the
original jurisdiction Of the Supreme Court of the United States
is fixed by the constitution, the appellate jurisdiction is no,
fixed by the constitution but left subject regulation by
Congress- The original jurisdiction Of the Supreme Court Is
exceedingly limited All relative to ambassadors pub
lie minister's consus and in which States are parties
are the only in which original jurisdiction conferred on
the Supreme Court by the constitution But the appellate uris-
dcton IS different That submitted directly the regua
uon OF Congress- the Senator will from the following
in all the before mentioned the supreme shall
nave appellate Jurisdiction both to fact with such
exceptions and under such regulations shall make
whist Then, the original jurisdiction must remain where
constitution fixes II, the appellate jurisdiction is expressly
M; PRs s1ns''uIon 70 be regulated BY Congress
Senator from New Hampshire The words Of his amend
ment are in all cases in which said Supreme Court Of the
oneo Saes would have jurisdiction if said cases had arisen
u any o. Inc United States" Now that only gives appel
late jurisdiction, but according the words of H. il NAV give
or attempt to give, original jurisdiction
Mr.. HALE. Oh, no.
Mr.. PRATT. I have not seen the amendment sXcsn, j.;
ne and was IN reference to the language Of it that
Mr.. HALE. think that will be shown from the seco,
to which il 10 proposed to be added.
Mr.. WEBSTER. Will the honorable member read the
whole amendment
Mr.. HALE. The amendment reads as follows
In all in which said Supreme Court of the United
States would have jurisdiction if said had any
OF the United States
PioPoo0u,
thus
Wrts Of error and appeals final decisions Of said
supreme court shall be allowed and be taken the SUI
preme Court of the United States the manner and
under the regulations from the circuit of the
United States all which said Supreme Court Of the
in any Of the United States"
Mr.. WEBSTER will say to the honorable member
from New Hampshire that have never treated the Judi
cature OF the Territories the the udcature OF the
States. We give direct appeal, limited only by the
amount and for departure from the usual
rule applicable to Territorial courts that Of the District
Of Columbia and SO forth. There great many questions
in which is not intended that the whole merits Of the case
should come before the Supreme Court among arising in
the State courts have mentioned the arising on
certificate Of difference of opinion between the judges If the
gentleman from New Hampshire considers the subject,
think ne will see that the best to pursue the
taken in the District Of Columbia grant appeal in all cases
involving certain limited amount
Mr.. CLAY. have one or two words only to say upon
this subject am inclined still to think that the amendment
proper one, though yield to the superior judgment of
others. If understand the object Of the Senator from New
Hampshire is to give jurisdiction by way of wr. of error
and appeal from the Territorial courts the Supreme Court
TO The and that only which exists the courts Of
the United States That understand be bis amendment
In the original bill, it stands there is limitation Of the
writ OF error and appeal to certain Of oney-one
thousand dollars. Now, let me put question
arises under the constitution, laws, treaties Of the
United States, that the party is entitled under the act of
1882 to bring before the Supreme Court for decision without
reference to the amount But if the bill remains as it now
stands, ne cannot bring question of that kind before the
Supreme Court Of the United States unless there is an
amount OF one thousand dollars involved That is the way
understand it. and it be So do any objection to
give the right OF appeal and writ of from the decision of
the Territorial courts to an extent commensurate with the
same right in the circuit courts of the United States
Mr.. WEBSTER, Gin his seat) There the amount is
two thousand dollars.
Mr.. CLAY. Not in the case Of constitutional questions
Mr.. BERRIEN. Yes in the case of constitutional
questions The object Of the Senator from New Hampshire
huvu IF
the Supreme Court of the United States irrespective of the
amount in controversy in the which provided for in
the twenty section of the Judcatue Act. Now those
cases are as follows
cree any suit in the highest of law equity of State
which decision in the suit could be had where
exercised une the United States and the decision is
their validity or where is drawn question the validity
ground Of their On 'se
laws OF the United States the decision is in favor Of
their validity where drawn question the
clause of the constitution, treaty statute Of or
commission held under the United States the decision
against the tie right privilege, exemption specially
constitution treaty, statute or commission may be
ned and reversed affirmed in the Supreme of the
United States upon writ Of error the citation being signed
BY the chief JUSTICE judge chancellor the
derlng or passing the judgment decree complained
bya justice Of the Supreme Court Of the United States in
writ shall have the effect the judgment or de-
complained of had been rendered passed in circuit
anu e proceeding upon the reversal shall also be the
same except that the Supreme Court instead of remandng
the cause for final decision before provided may their
discretion the shall have been reanded BEFORE
proceed to final decision of the award execution
But shall be assigned regarded ground Of
reversal in such aforesaid on
the face OF the record and Immediately respects before
mentioned questions Of validity construction of the said
constitution treaties atutes commissions authortiesn
dispute"
Those are the cases. Well, now what the object of
tina. provision in the judiciary 1889 II was invest
the Supreme Court Of the United States with power Decide
on last resort upon questions spngng out Of done by
authority Of the United States. II for this object to
enable the United States make the Interpretation Of their
laws, Of their constitution, Of their treaties and of the
acts done under their authority that this provision the 25th
section, anoduced into the act Whence the necessity Of
giving with regard the Territorial courts The answer
is that although by the provisions Of this bill you may bring
by appeal every which has been decided in the Terri
toal above the value Of O0O yet that other
those referred to in this section Of the judiciary acshoudbe
transferred to the Supreme Court Of the United States BY ap
peal without regard to the amount which is involved Now
sir that object will most certainly be accomplished by the
amendment introduced by the Senator from New Hampshire
He provides that all these cases shall be taken up by
appeal In the from the circuit courts Of the
United States the Supreme Court Of the United States
The section which have read does apply the circuit
courts Of the United States There these questions as well
as every other, are subject to limitation Of So, 0O0 Yos
cannot bring up from the circuit any that involves
question Of fact Of the constitution treaties or laws
OF the United States, any act done under its authority,
unless the amount in controversy exceeds The re-
transfer OF from the Territorial the Supreme Court the
number Of cases that will be brought up will be restricted
hope am understood by the Senator from New Hampshire
Mr. HALE. Will the Senator allow moment
Mr.. BERRfEN, (yielding the aoor) Certainly.
Mr.. HALE Does the Senator from Georgia mean say