The Nevada journal., 1855-12-14
IMpoRrAnr DEcrsIow-A very impor-

4
IMPORTANT DEcrsroN.-A very impor-
tant and interesting decision by Judge
Munson is published in the Tribune of
Tuesday, relative to the right of appeal
from the State to Federal Courts.
The limited space in our columns pre-
cludes the possibility of publishing the
opinion entire. The Supreme Court of
California in the case of Gordon. vs. John
son made decision which totally dissev-
cred our State Courts from the National
By that decision citizen of New York
or Virginia, bringing an action in our
courts, was obliged to abide.by the YER
dict, whatever it might be, without the
right to appeal to higher tribunal. To
many this was startling doctrine. 1t
cut us off from the benefits of the Federal
Judiciary. To all intents and purposes,
so far as the Judicial department of the
Government is concerned, our connection
with the Union was practically dissolved.
The late Legislature looked upon this move
of the Supreme Court as a novel and
alarming one, and accordingly passed an
act providing for the transfer of certain
cases from the State to the National
Courts.
Judge Monson argues the unconstitu-
tionality of the Act of the Legislature, in
the foil owing manner:
"What docs the act of the Legislature
in question propose to accomplish Does
it seek to reverse the decision of the Su-
preme Court in the case of Gordon vs.
Johnson IF it docs, then it would be an
assumption of Judicial authority, and un,
constitutional and void But counsel for
defendant deny that the Legislature had
any such intention, or that the act has
any such effect 1t is urged and alleged
that the Legislature, without attempting
to question the decision in the case of
Gordon vs. johnson, in the passage of the
act created and conferred a new right
Let US consider such to have been the OBJ
iject and intent of the Legislature. Ifthe
act does confer a new right, what is it,
Why jurisdiction upon Courts of the Uni
ted States in cases commenced and insti-
tuted in State Court Can State Legis-
lature confer jurisdiction upon the Courts
of the United States' 1 had always sup
posed that the Courts of the United States
derived all their power and authority from
the Constitution of the United States, and
the acts of Congress, and that they could
acquire jurisdiction from no other source.
In the case of Gordon vs. johnson, land
which | have attempted to show is bind
ing and conclusive upon me. the Supreme
Court of this State has decided that under
the Constitution of the United States, the
Courts of the United States have no juris-
diction in cases commenced in State
Court. If such is the law, can the Legis-
lature of this State supply deficiency
existing in the Constitution Of the United
States, and confer jurisdiction' If the
Constitution of the United States confers
jurisdiction, the Courts of the United
States possess it independent of any State
Legislative act. If the Constitution docs
not confer it, can State Legislature in
vest them with it,"
The Judge still further argues that the
act of the Legislature is clearly unconsti-
tutional because, it seeks to deprive the
Courts of the State of Jurisdiction cquir-
ed under the Constitution, by transferring
cases to the Federal Courts which are for
eign. The Legislature is not competent
to GUST State Court of its jurisdiction
which is granted by as high authority as
that under which the Legislative branch
of the State Government acts.
The decision is an important one to
lawyers. The case seems to be strongly
presented by Judge Monson on one side.
The opposite is finely argued in a speech
of Senator Tuttle on the third reading of
the Bill providing COR the transfer of GER
tain cases to the Federal Courts, passed
by tho last Legislature.
/