True American. [volume] (Steubenville [Ohio]) 1855-1861, 1856-11-12

eign States Of this Union, at the instance |
of eminent counsel and after full argumen,
having denied the COnsttutionality Of the
Act.
Aud lastly, because the po,Csr 20 nat
aralize an alien being judicial po,Osr
necessarily arising under the constitution,
and congress having no authority under
the constitution to vest any part of the
Judicial pOtOer of the United States in
State courts, or in courts not ordained
and established by itself. the act of con.
gress ol 1902 comforting upon state courts
the po,cer TO naturGlize aliens, is re-
pugnsnt to the consultation, and therefore
void. q,
Sd. The Court Of Quarter Sessions was
not asked "to declare the Constitution Of
the United States unconstitutional"
This proposition upon its face is ridicu-
lously absurd and an improper inuendo
upon the action ofcounsel, whether it en-
auate from private citizen, or from an
Honorable Court, in delivering judicial
or extra judicial opinion. The Court was
impliedly asked 10 look at the Constitu-
tion of The United states /; an instrument
which the Court is sworn to support as
the Supreme law of the land, and deter
mine whether an act Of congress was, or
was not repugnant to that constitution,
and /" why does Judge swear TO discharge
his duties agreeably to The Constitution
of the United States, if that Constitu-
ton forms no rule for his government"
4Ih Upon the fourth point made by
tho Court Of Quarter Sessions, it is sufi
cient to remark, that the writer has been
unable TO discover any reported decision
in Pennsylvania directly asserting the
validity of the act of congress vesting the
power to naturalize in state courts, and
if such decisions have been made, they
could add not validity to an act ofcongress
inherently unconstitutional. And as to
"the Uniform practice of every court in
the State Of Pennsylvania and ell sewhere
this court among the number" we can
only submit, that the veriest tyro in the
profession knows that neither half a
cen:ury's nor century's uniform prac-
tice, whether by the Courts of Quarter
, Sessions in Pennsylvania or elsewhere,
conld give the slightest authoritative sane
tion-and the least judicial strength, or
impart constitutional force to an uncon-
stitutional act of Congress for in the Ian.
guagc Of Chief Justice MARSHALL, q
Cranch 49, "this doctrine would sub
vert the very foundations of all written
constitutions. 1t would declare that an
act, which according TO the principles
and theory oi our government, is entire
ly void. is yet, in practice, completely
obligatory"
will not pause here further to argue
the proposition. II carries within itself
its own antidote, nor would | have writ
ten word upon it, but that desire tc
absolve myself from all responsibility
or paternity Of so glaring an incongrui.
ty. ...
5.-As to the fifth proposition Of the
Court relative 10 the disfranchisement ''oi
our fellow citizens" &C., / would sub
nit without admitting the state of facts
detailed TO be the legitimate result of a
constitutional adjudicalo Ion upon the sub
ject. thgt if the consequences should
prove so disastrous as impiedly, if not
directly, aIledged by the Court, the res.
possibility rests upon Congress, and upon
the courts of Quarter Sessions that have
inconsiderately carried into execu-
ton an unconstitutional act; not upon
those questioning the power of inferior
Sta.e tribunals to naturalize aliens.
Congress undoubtedly has the power
to ordain and establish inferior Courts
in the various districts Of the United
States for the naturalizations Of aliens
Such power has been exercised by Con
gress, and it should again be exercised,
as just intimated, in order that the consti
tutional powers Of the governmen, may bt
faithfully administered.
i 1t might here be remarked, that th'
court of Quarter Sessions Of Allegheny
county, even admitting the acl Of congress
} of 1902 to be valid and constitutional ha
not clearly been vested with the powe
10 naturalize. The act confers the powe
only upon state courts " having common
/, law iurisdiclion," and very strong doubt
exists as to the fact of our Court of Quar-
; ter Sessions having such common Law
} jurisdiction as to bring within the mean
ing of the act.
1t was matter most remote from m,
expectation, and certainly very unp'eas
ant one, that | should meet the necessity
on this or any other occasion, Of defen
ding myself professionally, against III
, published opinions Of Hon. Courts bu
silence in this instance, would be self.a
basement; and while l would frankly dis
S avow the responsibility of the pubishe
: propositions Of the court, 1 must be pei
; milted to say, in imitation. of the Hor
Court that these remarks dre made fC
y the sole reason that the published propt
: sition of the court could be interpreted
no other light than ref ection upon tn
n information, or professional integrity,
parties making the application on Salu
u day. g..
Whether the Clerks of "the cour
J of the United Safes in Pittsburgh al
y y Philadelphia will make their fortunes
:" :. a short time" or not, is que
= ton having nothing TO do with II
= adjudication of "a great constitutional que
. tion, and should not be published impl
=. edly as reason to sustain any judicial tr
: y bunallin judicial determination. True Il
!" annlicatioo nm Sainrdav was made at Il