Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1853-01-11
Tm wHHn1Na nRIDen.

TEE WHEELING BRID9H. IN
The following letter, from the correspondent of
the New York Courier on the subject ofthe Wheel
ing Bridge case, will be found Of interest at this
time, Notwithstanding the various points are famI-
liar to readers. Its more peculiarly interesting
now, from the fact that the order of the Supreme
Court is to beeGecuted in February, unless some
action be had in the meantime which will render
such course unnecessary. The letter Is datetl:
WuaHKeroN, Deeember20.
II is probable that one of the most gTaYe and
important issues which has ever arisen under our
foEm of Government, involving, no less than con-
fct Of jurisdiction OF collision Of authority between
the judicial and legislative Departments, may occur
at an early day. At the last regular term Of the
Supreme Court, the case prosecuted by the State Of
Pennsylvania VS.. the Wheeling aud Belmont Bridge
Company, contesting the legal right Of the bridge
across the Ohio at W heelfng, was argued and de-
cided. A large majority OF the Court, as many as
six against two (the latter being Judges fancy and
Daniels held that the bridge was an obstruction to
the free navigation of the river, and therefore
nuisance, inJegal contemplation. Butin order to
relieve the Company from any extraordinary cost,
the decree admitted that an elevation OF one hum
dred and eleven feet from low water, for width of
three hundred feet the channel of the river,
would bsfegarded rs an abatement Of the nuisance
aud q removal OF the obstruction
When this opinion vas pronounced, the counsel
forthe bridge suggested to the Court that the OBJ
struction nigh be removed bymaking a draw; and
it was ordered that Mr.. McAlpine, the engineer to
whom the subject was refeued, should report his
opinion before the second Monday.i in the ensuing
May. When the Court again convened, the original
decree was modified as to allow the Bndge Com
pany to construct draw OF two hundred feet in
length LcroSs the western channel to be used when
navigation was interrupted under the suspension
bridge, which was to be considered an abatement
ofthe nuisance. The compromise was acceptable
at the time and both parties seemed gTatifed.
Congress was in session at and after both these
periods As soon as the first decision OF the Court
-. II a...n
printed and circulated through the western country
laaSs meetings convened in the States0f Ohio,
Indiana and Illinois, and their Representatives were
instructed to vote for such legislation as would ef-
fectaa4l v4ti4te the decree OF the Supreme Court.
Accordingly, "a amendment was offered to the Post
Office appropriation bill declaring the w heeling
bridge post route and legal structurei IN other
words precisely what the Court had decided 1t was
not This amendment becams the law OF the land
and as such it stands day. The Bridge Company
have not yet exhibited any disposition to comply
with the order of the Court and claim to be absolTed
from nlresponsibility by the Intervention of Con-
greas. lElsl
When The modified decree of the Court was Civ
en-, It was ordered that tie counsel on either side
might move in regard to the execution on the first
AlOadayin February next And 1t IS to be preSu-
medsihe State of Pennsylvania will be Ieprese nted
here then, 10 demand the execution, and the ad-
verse party resist the motion, on the ground that
the fesfsatcn cited inteTposes unconstitutional bar
Nov, suppose the Court sustaining its own de-
liberate Judgement, should hold that the nuisance
has not been abated according to its order,s and
aud should direct the United States Marshal 10 re-
move the bridge what would occur3 The people
of Wheeiigg would probably resist the Marshal,
under the PreteHt that they were UNFOLDING the
law Of Congress, and then the question would
arise, " neither the President would sustain the
CoaEt blythe military power, or allow 1t to be res
trained by The mobl
Noone doubts the full commercial power of
Congress, andIIs rights TO legalize this structure
miller the ordinary exercise of that p0WeL But
here Ssas special case unerthe existing laws, de-
cide by ile highest judicial tribunal, and the leg
islaion was Observation-Disclosures professel to the
contralyAto snbVeTt tFat decision. Now which
Sbsl stand the law as interpreted by the constitu-
1ional authority, or law contriyed to defeat the
exercise Of that anthorty2 This is a serious pro-
n, sition, and cannot be too much deliberated.-l
There Is great danger IN tampenng with the 1udl
ciaTg under, any circumstances. but sun greater
danger when the yehemence of interested and ex-
cited opinion is brought to bear upon Congress,
for the express purpose of over'hrowing its judge
ments. II the market houses and the stumping
grounds, where demagogues most do congregate,S
are 70 deternlne the law as Is pfacncally conIei
plated In this instance, what's the use Of Courts
al am : Coneede this much and more will soon be
II dairgd Strike at the integrity of the bench by
annuiling 1its DEGREES, and before long the tap
rooms and 'barbacueS' will resound with impeach-
mems against your judges, to be tired on the CHAR
ges ,of fnaud.in and debaSed politicians. We are
al Inc beginning, let US take heed, lest We soon
reach. the end. '. s.aa ssr i--s
Nge CLIP the foregoing from the Pittsburgh Com
ru;erciaI Journal, and our readers may give to the
Enrmises therein contained what credit they think
There can be but little question as to what
would be the course of our citizens with the law
ON Their side, and we presume that the President
Of he United States, whose duty the Constitution
declares 10 be to see that the laws are faithfully
executed" will have but little difficulty in decide
inf hat he will rather sustain the ialO itself than
thdsg Who assume to exPound and interpret it,
Tie fact is our Federal courts little too Federal
"a assnnes degree Of power and jurisdiction not
warranted by The Constitution, and dangerous to
me kfity ofthe sates, and the rights of the
p9obie. 'WhiIe "there IS great danger in tampef-
ing withIhe judiciary, there is much greater inthe
tamperine with the law, and " hen the
eooi,it assumed powers which they had no right to-
tbeIe wee buttwo courses LEFT, either to submit
ana De Oppressed by it IN future or TO corectlt as
they did bSmild means, rather than resort to the
moe strfI GENT alternative which remained. Let
Letter writers write on then. We have our bridge,
and We RfI Keep it, and we incline to the opinion
tbst the majority OF the supreme Bench viii hence
f6fiE more discretion lhan it did when it
9edf ffdsdiction over asubiect with which it
had no coaeefn. Even the august court can leain
wisdom from experience.
sTTbe New YJtkl Morning Express. in money
ssticiei State authorities of Ohio and
tSe sales.--future seem to be at war whit the cunen=
Nv and the banks. The taxes on coEporais and
banking, amount almost to prohibition TO
81 emliploymant of acapital At fam interest to
tbe bush g community. The separation Of bank
,nd sfsfs Is complete, as an individual agent Is
now aauibysa By the State to pay the interest, in
q q "a 5ebi6 Ii and Trest insurance. Compa[
Pflf = III S9.E 81 sls,i.s - : - .