The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1905-04-02


tive and useful than the chapter in which
are set forth tho reasons for the establish
nent Of Federal courts. We are so ao-
customed to the existence Of such tribunals
that most Of Va forget that under the Arti-
cles Of Confederation there was no prov-
sion for Federal Judiciary. Our expert
ence, however. under the Articles demon
strated that Federal Government il lame
and impotent IL II must depend for the
Interpretation Of IT, Constitution and stat
utes and for the determination OF the
powers OF its Department., so far as they
may be iudicially called In question, upon
the decisions Of the courts Of the respective
States Of which II is composed. An obvious
difficulty would be that the courts Of diff
ferent States might entertain diverse views
as 10 the construction OF the Constitution
and statutes Of tho Federation. 40 that the
Federal law might be one thing In Massa-
chusetts and another thing in Virginia
1t was recognized, therefore, by the Phil
adeIphia convention OF 1887 20 be indis-
pensable for tho stability and perpetuity
Of the Union that there should be Federal
courts in which the rights OF parties depend
ing upon the Constitution and statutes Of
the United States could be ultimately de-
cided in accordance with some consistent
rule receiving uniform recognition through
out the Federation. Justice MoClain in
dictates some other purposes for which
Il was important that there should be Federal
courts For instance, IL would greatly
embarrass the relations Of the Federal
Government with foreign Powers II the
Ambassadors, public Ministers and Consuls
OF the latter. while in this country, should
be subject 20 the jurisdiction Of courts
not constituting part Of the Federal Gov
eminent Then, again, az 70 navigation
on the high seas. Federal courts are plainly
needed to determine controversies relating
thereto; for the ships OF the United States
while on the high seas, are deemed part
Of United States territory, although they
are beyond the jurisdiction Of any State.
Il il desirable, too, that there be tribunals
in which the Federal Government may
prosecute crimes against the laws Of the
United States, and bring civil suits in the
national interest against individuals; It
would, manifestly, be embarrassing and
inoonvenient for that Government 10 be
compelled TO prosecute such actions in
State courts.
There are even cases in which the Fed
eral Government has no direct interest, yet
as 20 which Il il clearly expedient that the
determination Of controversies should be
admitted to tribunals other than State
courts. For instance. in disputes between
two States respecting their boundaries
il would not be advisable to allow the courts
Of either State to render a final decision.
1t could not be expected that either State
would be satisfied with a decision rendered
in such a matter by the COURTS Of the other
State. So, too, in controversies between
a State and citizens Of another State; or
between citizens Of different States; or be-
tween citizens OF a State and foreign Pow
ers or the citizens or subjects thereof.
In all these cases il il desirable that the
final jurisdiction should be lodged In some
court Of higher authority than the courts Of
a State This branch Of the jurisdiction Of
our Federal courts lie thus justified on the
score Of eKpediency, although il cannot be
described as essential to the sovereignty
and independence Of the Federal Govern
ment.