Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1880-03-25

mHuison, ana tie adJudication has been
affirmed in numerous instances since.
The limitation upon Congress would
seem to be conclusive OF the case from
Ohio. To authorize criminal prosecu-
tion in the Federal courts for an offense
against law Of IA State, is to extend the
Judicial power of the United States to
case not arising under the Constitution
or laws of the United States.
But there is another view of this sub.
ject which is equally conclusive against
the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
The act of Congress asserts power In.
consistent with and destructive of the
independence of the States. The right
to control their own officers, TO pre-
scribe the duties they shall perform,
without the supervision or interference
of any other authority, and the penal.
ties TO which they shall be subjected
for violation OF duty is essential to
that independence. If the Federal
Government can punish violation of
the laws of the State, it may punish
obedience TO them, and graduate the
punishment according to its own judg.
ment of their propriety and wisdom.
1t may thus exercise control over the
legislation OF the States subversive OF all
their reserved rights. However large
the powers conferred upon the Gov
ernment formed by the Constitution,
and however numerous its restraints,
the right to enforce their own laws by
such sanctions as they may deem ap.
propriate is left, where it was originally
with the States. 1t is a right which
haa L.
State could not be considered as
independent in any matter with respect
to which its officers in the discharge of
their duties could be subjected to pun.
ishment by an external authority. nor
in which its officers in the execution of
its laws could be subject to the super.
vision and interference OF others. When.
ever, therefore, the Federal Government.
instead of acting through its own off.
GERS, seeks to accomplish its purposes
through the agency OF officers of the
States it must accept the agency with
the condition upon which the officers
are permitted TO act. For example,
the Constitution invests Congress with
the "power to establish a uniform rule
of naturalization" and this power, from
its nature is exclusive. A concurrent
power in the States would prevent the
uniformity OF regulations required on
the subject. Yet Congress, in legislat.
ing under this power, has authorized
courts of record of the States to receive
declarations under oath by aliens of
their intention to become citizens, and
to admit them to citizenship after a
limited period of residence, upon satis.
factory proof as to character and at.
tachment to the Constitution. But
when Congress prescribed the condition
and proof upon which aliens might, by
the action of the State courts, become
citizens, its power ended. 1t could not
coerce the State courts 10 hold sessions
for such applications. nor fig the time
when they should hear the applicants.
nor the manner in which they should
administer the required oaths, nor reg.
ulate in any way their procedure. IL
could not compel them TO act by man.
damus from its own tribunals, nor sub.
ject their judges to criminal prosecution
for their non. action. 1t could accept
the agency OF those courts only upon
such terms as the States should pre-.
scribe. The same thing is true in all
is used and this doctrine applies with
special force to judges of elections at
which numerous State officers are chos-
en- at the same time with Representa-
tives to Congress. So far rs the election
Of State officers and the registration Of
voters for their election are concerned,
the Federal Government has confessed.
ly no authority TO interfere. And yet
the supervision of and interference with
the State regulations, sanctioned by the
act OF Congress, when Representatives TO
Congress are voted for, amount practi.
cally to supervision Of and an inter.
ference with the election of State officers
and constitute a plain encroachment
upon the rights of the States which is
well calculated to create irritation to.
wards the Federal Government and
disturb the harmony that all good and
patriotic men should desire to exist be-
tween it and the State governments.
IL was the purpose of the trainers of the
Constitution TO create a government
which could enforce its own laws
through its own officers and tribunals
without reliance upon those OF the
States, and thus avoid the principal
defect of the Governr,ent OF the Con.
federation /; and they fully accomplish
ed their purpose, for, as said by Chief
Justice Marshall in the Mccullough
case, mo trace is to be found in the
Constitution of an intention to create
dependence Of the Federal Government
on the governments OF the States for
the execution OF the great power assign.
ed to il. Its means are adequate to its
ends, and on those means alone was it
expected to fSzy for the accomplish.
ment Of its ends" When, therefore,
the Federal Government desires to
compel by coercive measures and puni.
tive sanctions the performance OF any
duties devolved upon it by the Consti.
tuition, it must appoint its own officers
and agents, upon whom its power can
be exerted. II it sees fit to intrust the
performance of such duties to officers of
State, it must take their agency, as