New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-12-16
FROM WARRINGTON.
PVGH UNDER DlFtiCOLiibo'
Correspondence Of The N " Tribune

II. iec,l gentlemen OF the Senate have been
,.,..,, sno,eed for a week in Discussing the ques-
on Of the constitu onahy OF the restrictive clause
estbe Missouri Compromise. The President seemed
10 say in bis Message Tor Caleb Cushing ior him)
that the Supreme Court had decided thi. that
slause was unconstitutional. But il was soon
found Il az cursory perusal failed to give the true
construction Of the Presidents allegation. A sim
ple-hearxd person, not on the watch a, the moment
for a cheat, woud mi.read the document, as lie
author intended and as people wi! do and have
done all over The country.
Mr.. Trumbull in his argument c'ei case 10
Pe,ers, SAC, to show that Judge Mar, bal hal de-
slded that Congress had, under the Constitution,
full legislative power over the Territories IL mas
been the effort Of gentlemen OH the other side 10 40
away with the force Of that decision. MI Cas-
kbored with great industry or this polat' bar hs
Efforts were unayallnp evidently 10 his Oan eyes,
for he concluded his examination OF the dec son W
declaring that Judge Marshall was very staPid al
the way through il. So far as an aware every
body who heard him came to the CONCLUSION lhil
there was stupidity somewhere, either IN the Juoee
or Commentator. Aud ] am not aware tha' Ju1ge
Na,sball's reputation has been very seriously az
fected BY the assault
But it was left TO the ingenuity Of Mr.. Pugh to
elaborate the case and try to overturn Mr.. Trum-
bulls position. This he attempted in his long ar
ument. which is published in Tie Globe Of Thurs
day. The effort there stands in black and white,
for the ridicule or admiration of all legal gentlemen
and the rest of mankind. 1! is not worth While for
me to say which, since the comments might be as
sumed to be prcjudices ! wish, however, to ex-
tract the areumen. of Mr.. Pugh on the point in
question which ] take from the report OF the
speech referred to:
"The assertion of the Senator from Illinois was ia l.
ths Court decided ia that that in exercising Jirs-
Dict, the Territories Congress employed all the
powers Of the Federal and OF SAFE Government.
That is not the language OF the Court; Dor has the
Court uttered any exression in relation to this SUBJECT
What the casel II Ia etsily stared a vessel hid
bsen driven ashore at Key West in Florida Tern0y,
and had been seized ne a wreck. The case was then
brought before, l think, Syndic Court with hve
juro 2 according to the Spanish law They held an IN
anf on the vessel and they condemned her as dee
lt and ordered her to be sold and the proceeds paid
70 the ssyors The master Of the vessel when be left
her On the high had abandoned her to the un Ter
wrtrTs to w.t. the American Insurance Co npany; aod
thtse underw riters brought their action Of tr)ver
again. the purchaser at that SALE claiming that leIe
wai sucb legal authority that aus ic Court was
mere Luty; that it had no admiralty powers 70 SIT in
Judicial proceeding was void
1.-THE qu. stion came to the SPreme Court for deter
inaOn. Mark yOu Sir, 1t was question OF admi-
ray jurisdiction. II the Syodic Court had Jurisdiction
in admiralty under the Constitution that end of
Abe upd, writer's case bee that judgment III aiml
Taty being, as We sAy judgment ~ rem ex1nguehed
the rp ht Of the under~iers as well as oil the owner
The Court spoke of 1T "a case OF admiralty lhe
argument made was, that the admiralty jlrisdt,-
ton OF the United States could only be exercised
by Courts the Judges of which were appointed by
n h. fh.a uQ
admitted that the jurisdiction OF the United States In
admiralty not only unlimited but exclu'ive, and,
in fact that has since been decided in 50 any words
But the proposition WAS that the judges of the Syn
die CouIt had never been appointed by the Pfes
dent an confirmed by the Senate. WHIST was tue an
ever Of the Supreme Court! Tue admiralty lnrsdIc
ton e the United States can be exercised within the
States only 10y Courts whose Judges are constituted as
ven say; but when you come to the Territories, Con-
efs the exercise OF its general authority to estao
st aud iouote Territorial orsanizat!on can confer
ths peI tfsl admiralty i,dcon which Is exclusive
in tie United States upon any Court II may see mt 70
sd,lt Now let US rec whether that IL not what tle
Coutis sag. Judge Marshall says; .....,.,.,
cOnteUdsd that by the Constitution the Judi
ea power the United States extends 10 all cases OF edn
aisl power ust BE- vesed supreme and such
reof Coul as Congress a. from im 70 e, Csaa 4ms
Admiralty jurisdiction in Courts created BY the Territorial
"Tf at was the argument. What was the answer
owe have only to pursue this 'ubect one step further -
perceive that this provision of the Constitution does not apply
the provision defining the quslfc alton of Co1rts.
next sentence declares that The judges both Of the
sSoa besa,ior The judges Of the Superior Courts
1 ssS eaSf n R %
Constitution the General Government be deposited
They iDcspsb. Of receiving it, They legislative courts
In OF the general right Of sovereignty which ex-
the Government virtue of that clause which eaab,s
Congress all peedu rules and regulations respecting
che territory belonging to the United States rne
power defined in the third article OF the Constitution
bot conferred by Congress- 10 the execution of those general
Oned States Although admiralty uIisdis hon can be s.I,
cised only which established IN
pursusnee Of article Of the Institution the same lin
shsm Congress exercises the power the General
aud OF . State Government. go
mot that Congress exercises all the powers OF a
State and the General Government; but that on the
subject of admiralty uisdction-a jurisdiction excu-
siyely and uniuotedly conferred on the United States
by the OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES, in legissting for the
Territories, acts both as General and State Govern
ntst. The Supreme Court has never considered this
Sueson in fact at least has never decided 1t; bat
ii understand the principles announced by that Court
In plumber Of decisions, there be result to this
discussion except Il at which the President himself has
indicated"
That is to say the Court decided that Congress
dos not derive its powers Of admiralty jurisdiction
in the Territories from the clause in the Constitu
top which gives it that jurisdiction in the States
but, on the contrary, derives it from the general
power Of legislation over the Territories given by
ether portions OF the Constitution
Yet in the face Of what is thus declared, Mr..
Push saws, in substance, that the Court has only
decided that Congress has admiralty Jurisdiction
in the Territories and iutimates that it is by vir
tue of the clause viii III gives s to that body In the
States Thus entirely misunderstanding or mis-