Senate.]

On the Judiciary.

[FEB. 16, 1825.

upon while his recollection of the transaction was still sire on the part of the Senate to proceed in this busifresh, and he does declare, unequivocally, that the jointness; but that was a distinct and very different question commissioners insisted that they had a claim for an from the one now under consideration. Yielding, as he amount which the United States unreasonably withheld. did, to the decision of yesterday, he should vote for the If they had such a claim while the treaty was in agita- recommitment of the bill, because he wished to test the tion, what was more reasonable, or what could be more principle of separating the duties of the Supreme Court natural, than to conclude that this claim would, of from those of the Circuit Court. The bill was not about course, be embraced in the treaty? In the act of ces- to be sent to a committee of oblivion; but they wished sion, on the part of Virginia, there is a clause similar to to introduce into the organization of the judicial esta that in the treaty with Georgia, except that lands are blishment a salutary, if not an indispensable principle. stipulated instead of money. The expenses in relation | He therefore hoped the bill would be recommitted, that to the lands now included in the state of Tennessee, they might give it a form satisfactory to the Senate. and which were then stipulated for, were expenses of a Mr. HOLMES, of Maine, said, if the bill were recommilitary kind. The gentleman from Georgia is certainly mitted, they would have to adopt an entire new system, mistaken in supposing that the General Government and they surely were not prepared to do that in the preheld itself bound for the expenses of these Georgia mili- sent session. One party were in favor of a new system, tia. On the contrary, they objected to the payment, whilst another wished to consign the present bill to obliand disputed the claim, because the operations on the vion; and as there was not time to adopt a new system, Georgia frontier were of an offensive character. The the question was, would they amend the old one to reGovernment did not pay the $13,000 referred to, believe the Western country from the distress under which cause provision was made for it in the treaty.

The question was then taken on Mr. TÁTTNALL'S motion for recommitment, and decided in the negative, and

The report of the Committee on Military Affairs, adverse to the present claim, was agreed to.

IN SENATE-WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1825. The Senate again took up, in committee of the whole, the bill to amend the Judicial System of the United States, and for the appointment of three additional Circuit Judges, (in the Western States,) the question pending being on the recommitment of the bill to the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. HAYNE said he should vote for the recommitment, not because he was opposed to the system being extended to the Western states, but because it was useless to enter into a full discussion of the Judicial System during the short remaining period of the present ses sion; it was impossible that the propositions submitted by the gentlemen from Virginia and Kentucky, could at present receive the attention they demanded. Had this subject been brought forward early in the session, they might have been prepared to act on it, but from some cause or other, it had been delayed, and now it was too late. A separate Court of Appeal had been proposed, and that question, if it received the discussion which it merits, would alone occupy the attention of the House for the whole week. He was perfectly willing to afford the relief asked for, but thought it would be lost time to discuss it at present.

Mr. TALBOT said that the question to recommit the bill was a mere repetition of that decided yesterday; and as it had been then decided in their favor by such a large majority, he had no fears of failing now. He could assure the Senate, that the bill had been drawn up with the greatest care and attention, and had been examined and approved by the members of the Supreme Court. The details were made perfect, as far as they could be, by those deeply interested in its success, and he thought its wanting shape or maturity could not be urged as an objection to it. It was, he said, merely an extension of the old system, and after having already suffered so long and so deeply for want of it, they surely did not intend that they should stil! suffer, even were it only till the next session, without relief being afforded.

Mr. VAN BUREN offered a few remarks; he expressed his unwillingness to go into the discussion at so late a period of the session, but he did not see how it could be avoided. He therefore felt himself under some sense of obligation and duty to proceed to the examination and discussion of the subject, unless the motion to recommit should to-day be successful.

it labored. The old system had been established in the year 1789; and an attempt was made to alter it, some. thing similar to the mode proposed by the gentleman from Virginia, but it was unsuccessful, for this alteration lasted but a few months. They were not, he thought, prepared to go into a measure of that kind at present, and he should like to know what were the evils which would arise from an extension of that system which had been tried so long, and had been found sufficient. All they were asked to do for the people of the West, was to extend or amend the present system, so that it should operate for their benefit. The evil was found to be great in that country, and it was incumbent on them to remedy it, more especially when the remedy was so easy. There was not, he thought, any danger in extending the present system, but they saw some risk in adopting

a new one.

Mr. MILLS, of Massachusetts, said, from the arguments used by some gentlemen on this subject, it might be taken for granted that the Western people only were interested in the question; this was not the case. Every part of the Union was equally interested in it, because the moment any alteration took place, whether by enlarging the number of Judges that at present composed the Supreme Court, or by forming two distinct courts, every state in the Union, and every individual who would be affected by the decisions of the court, would be as much interested as the people of the West could be. He thought some alteration should be made in the present system, and was convinced of the necessity and importance of adopting one that should act equally on all the states in the Union, and afford to all equal advantages; but he was not prepared to say that the one now before them was superior to all others. He hoped the bill would be recommitted, for then the three propositions that had been submitted, would be laid before the committee, who would duly consider them, and if there were time they would act on them during the present session; if not, the subject must necessarily be deferred till the ensuing session.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, said he was struck with the remark that had been made, that they only asked for an extension of the present system-he was willing to rest on that ground. The gentleman who had moved to recommit, had done so to endeavor to separate the Supreme Court from the Circuit system. The sense of the Senate on the subject would now therefore be ascer tained. If the vote were in favor of the recommitment, it would be certain they were willing to change the system altogether; if not, they would be willing to extend the present system, and a bill for that purpose was already prepared, and was now before them.

Mr. EDWARDS, of Connecticut, said, he wished to Mr. BARBOUR took it for granted, from the vote yes-hear the merits of the system discussed before giving his terday, on the motion to postpone, that there was a de- vote, and it was for that reason that he had voted for the

postponement. There certainly was not time during the present session, to examine and do justice to the proposition. He thought it should be deferred till the next session, and wished that every gentleman who had framed any plan, would then bring it forward, so as to have the subject thoroughly discussed. He should vote for the recommitment of the bill, but in so doing, he should not consider himself pledged to support the system which had been suggested by the gentleman from Virginia, nor did he wish to be understood as being opposed to the extension of the one now existing. He was influenced by no other motive in giving his vote, than the conviction that there was not time now to act on so important a subject.

The question was then taken on the motion to recommit the bill, and decided by yeas and nays, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Bouligny, Branch, Clayton, Cobb, D'Wolf, Edwards, Elliott, Findlay, Hayne, King, of N. Y. Knight, Lowrie, McIlvaine, Mills, Parrott, Taylor, Tazewell, Van Buren, Van Dyke, Williams.-23.

[Senate.

honorable gentleman whether the ma who was to decide on the rights of his constituents came from one of the distant states, or any corner of this Union. Mr. J. said he wanted Kentucky to decide for Kentucky.They wanted the measure of justice extended to them that had been extended to the old states for forty years, and yet their doctrine was said to be heretical. He had said before, and he repeated it, they had a right to a judicial representation on the bench of the Supreme Court, in the sense in which he took it. He meant only the extension of the system to all the States-of that system which secured to Virginia two Supreme Judges, and he did not speak of it in any other point of view.

M. J. wished to do away with the trouble and confusion that had arisen in this country from the words, impairing the obligation of contract, but he did not deny the solemnity of the principle the words contained. He only spoke of the confusion that had been introduced into the judiciary of the whole Union by those words. He thought the gentleman could not tell him what was the construction put on those words by the Supreme NAYS.-Messrs. Bell, Brown, Chandler, Dickerson, Court of the Union. It had been decided many times, Eaton, Gaillard, Holmes, of Me. Holmes, of Miss. Jack-in different ways, in the State he (Mr. J.) represented. son, Johnson of Ken., Kelly, King, of Alab., Lanman, He complained of the words because they allowed of Lloyd, of Mass. McLean, Macon, Noble, Palmer, Rug- a latitude that involved state rights and state sovereignty, gles, Seymour, Smith, Talbot, Thomas.-23. of which Virginia had complained as loud as any. He did say, and he repeated it, those words were introduced into the constitution without intending to give them any importance, yet more confusion had grown out of them than from any words in the constitution for many years past.

The Senate being equally divided on the question, the motion to recommit was lost, and the consideration of the bill proceeded.

Mr. TALBOT moved to add a section to the bill fix ing, hereafter, the commencement of the annual term of the Supreme Court on the second Monday inį January, and requiring its continuance each term, until it shall have disposed of all the business before it.

This amendment was rejected, without debate, by the casting vote of the chair-18 members rising for it, and 18 against it.

If the doctrine were true, that responsibility diminish. ed in an inverse ratio as numbers increased, then the body to whom he now addressed himself might as well consist of twenty-four as of forty-eight members. The House of Representatives would be better with half its present number. The same principle would apply—and the Supreme Court had better consist of one member than seven.

Mr. TAZEWELL, then, for the purpose, he said, of trying the sense of the Senate on the most important feature of the bill, moved so to amend it as to provide that the three additional circuit judges shall not be jus-ed tices of the Supreme Court.

He thought that equal justice would never be extendto them, without they were fairly represented, each judge having a district allotted to him, in which he could reasonably move. They did not wish for inferior judges, who were, in a manner, disfranchised, to be sent amongst them; that was not the remedy they wanted. What they asked for was a remedy which should strike at the root of the evil; and he did think they would be degraded if they received judges who were disfranchised from setting on the Supreme Bench.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, said, that the effect of this amendment would be to degrade the Western States. There was a clause in the constitution, that States, on coming into the Union, should receive equal rights and privileges. He had said, on a former occasion, that it was not to be expected that these States were, in their infancy, to receive, at once, all the benefits of the system, but now, after so much time had passed, and their He should, he said, be unwilling to trust the decision claims was so generally acknowledged, they were fully of those great constitutional questions, which might entitled to be placed on an equality with the other humble the state sovereignties to the dust, to any tribuStates; and what was it that was now offered to them?nal on earth that was not direct from the people, and They would allow them circuit judges, but they were not to occupy a seat on the Supreme Bench of the Union. Against this he protested. Mr. J. made a few more remarks in opposition to this motion; when

for the decisions of such questions they ought to have a majority of six instead of three, by increasing the number of judges. He trusted, therefore, that the amendment of the gentleman from Virginia would not prevail. Mr. TALBOT, of Ken. rose and said, that the immense

Mr. TAZEWELL offered, succinctly, his reasons for submitting his amendment, and to shew the unreasona-importance of the proposition which was the subject of bleness and impropriety of different parts of the coun- this discussion, not only to that section of the Union, for try claiming an exact portion of Judges on the bench of whose immediate and more peculiar benefit it is calcu the Supreme Court, and the absurdity of resorting to lated and intended to operate, but to every portion of the principle of judicial representation to procure im-this widely extended Union, must be his apology for atpartial justice, &c.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, said he wished to say a few words in answer to the gentleman from Virginia, and first, as to judicial representation. He supposed that it was the duty of every individual to put the precise construction on the words in debate, which the individual using those words intended to communicate. If, therefore, from the defectiveness of his language, the gentleman had extended his meaning of the words judicial representation, he hoped he should receive the pardon of that honorable body, in giving a short explanation of his meaning. It might be the same thing to the

tempting some opposition to the motion of the honorable gentleman from Virginia, who, in addition to the proposition of his honorable colleague (Mr. BARBOUR,) has favored us with his new projet as a substitute for the bill upon your table.

This last amendment, offered by the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. TAZEWALL,) the subject of the present discussion is, to my mind, Mr. President, the more inadmissible-I must say, intolerable, than all the propositions which have been submitted to this honorable body, or for the reformation or improvement of the present organization of our judicial system. Of the importance of this

Senate.]

On the Judiciary.

[FEB. 16, 1825.

department of our national institutions, of that depart- long and tried experience, the surest foundation of hument which is concerned in the daily administration of man wisdom, and best guarantee for the permanency, as distributive justice to the citizens of these United well as value of all human institutions, has affixed the States, by a speedy, correct, and impartial decision of stamp of its approbation on its value and utility, this their various controversies, which arise to disturb the tried experienced, and this long approval of the present happiness of domestic or social life, we cannot speak system, by the American People, ought to form a strong too strongly, or estimate too highly. The effects and barrier, which they have thrown around these existing operations of the other departments of your Govern- institutions, not to be lightly or easily prostrated by the ment-of your legislative and executive-the law giving experiments of new and untried theories of mere specu and the law executing functionaries of national authori-lation. Unless, indeed, such new theories shall be ty, you feel the force and enjoy the benefits at intervals. found, on examination, to be based upon foundations of But the action of the judicial functions, is that which, as reason and argument of the most satisfactory and con it pervades more intimately the affairs and concerns of clusive character. Such, to my mind, Mr. President, 'men, has an almost incessant and constant influence on have not been the character or force of the arguments the society, the peace and happiness of which it was in-presented to the Senate by either of the honorable gen stituted to preserve and promote. With what caution men from Virginia, in favor of their respective projets, and deliberate reflection, aided by all the lights of with which we have been favored in the course of this wisdom and matured experience, ought we to approach debate. this interesting subject! Influenced by these considerations, the friends of the proposition embraced by the bill on your table, contemplate by its provisions, no radical change in the organization of your judicial system, which has been so long in operation; a system which framed by the experienced wisdom of many of those sages to whom the glorious charter of our liberties, the Federal Constitution, owes its birth, claims to participate large. ly in the advantages which so much wisdom, skill, and political knowledge and experience could bring to so great a work as the organization of a judicial system, corresponding to the wants, wishes, and interests of our extensive confederation.

This system, Mr. President, established by the act of 1789, framed in so much wisdom and experience-sanctioned by such names as the Congress of the United States of that period enrolled in the catalogue of its members-adopted as its model, for the outlines of its institution, that of the British Empire, from whom we derive our origin, and many of our inestimable institutions; and whose Judiciary, whatever we may think or say of the faults or defects of other departments of her Government-of the inequality of representation, or corruption of her House of Commons-of the aristocratic and dangerous character of her House of Lords, or of the arbitrary prerogatives of her King-as regards her Judiciary, it has been in its general organization, in the purity and correctness of its administration of distributive justice, the pride of that nation, and the admiration of the civilized world. The union of original and appellate jurisdiction in the twelve Judges of Westminster Hall, who, in their allotted circuits, traverse the extent of the British Isle, holding in each county, or shire, of that kingdom, a court of Nisi Prius, for the trial of causes arising within them, and adjourning questions of novelty, difficulty, or peculiar magnitude, to the Court of King's Bench, or other revising and controlling court of appellate jurisdiction at Westminster-has never yet been held as a blemish, much less of fatal error in the organization of the British Courts. Nor has the number of twelve judges, of which the courts of Westminster are composed, been complained of as inadequate to the discharge of the functions incident to the holding the courts of Nisi Prius, from age, infirmity, or any of those causes which are alleged by honorable gentlemen, as disqualifying the judges of our own Supreme Court from the discharge of the functions of Circuit Judges, to which they have been found entirely competent through the course of our long experience for a period of five and thirty years.

If this period, Mr. President, having its origin almost coeval with the origin and introduction of our happy form of Government, during which a generation has passed away, has marked the present system with no striking imperfection, with no flagrant abuse, indicating incurable defects in its general organization or prominent features-if, on the contrary, this faithful test of

The plan of my honorable friend, (Mr. BARBOUR,) who moved you for the recommitment of this bill, for the purpose of maturing his projet, is to exempt the present Judges, who constitute the Supreme Court of the United States, from all the duties of presiding in, or holdng the Circuit Courts, assigning, by his plan, all the du ties of those courts, with any other appertaining to the exercise of original jurisdiction to a new corps of judges, to be created and appointed for this purpose, with the creation of salaries adequate to the attainment of this object. My honorable friend, passing by the considerations of the increase in the national expenditure, as matters unworthy his sublime genius and contemplations; and forgetful that the plan in substance, which he now proposes, was not only offered, but adopted, and put in to prompt and immediate operation some five and twen ty years ago, and was then found so little adapted to the interests or the sentiments of the American People, as to call from them at once, in terms too loud and strong to be resisted, or denied, an imperious demand for its repeal. A repeal was as promptly acceded to by the councils of the Nation, and a newly created host of judges, stripped of their salaries, their offices, and their honors, before time had been given them to enjoy, or even taste the delicious flavor of the dainties, which bad been placed before them-to warm the seats on which they had been placed, or to be warmed by the ermines with which they had been enshrouded.

The honorable gentlemen from Virginia both ob ject to increase the number of the Judges who at present compose this tribunal, which is urged and claimed to be one of the objects of the bill on your table. This objection, although plausible as it first presents itself, to increase the number of a tribunal now consisting of se ven Judges, will soon vanish on the slightest examina tion of the nature, extent, and importance of the func tions bestowed, and which, by our constitution, as it now exists, must necessarily be vested in this most tremendous and awful tribunal; for, such are its characteristics of power and jurisdiction, as legitimately vested in this Court by the terms as well as the fair scope and objects of the Federal Constitution: powers and jurisdiction far beyond those of the far famed Areopagus of Atheas, Mr. President, transcendent, as they are known to have been, presiding as it did, in the pride and plenitude of its powers, not only over the laws, and deciding the controversies arising between the citizens of that powerful and splendid Republic, but empowered to watch over the police of the city of Athens and its vari ous territories, but also to superintend the morals and the habits, and to regulate even the pleasures and amusements of the Athenian people. The Supreme Court of the United States is not only vested with pow ers and jurisdiction the most ample, for the decision of all questions and controversies arising under the constitution of the United States, the great charter of our rights and liberties; of all laws enacted under its su

FEB. 16, 1825.]

On the Judiciary.

[Senate.

thority; of all our controversies arising with foreign na- of increased numbers in the composition of judicial tritions, whether originating from alleged infractions of bunals, because, as he alleges, by adding such increase treaty stipulations; violations of the public law, as be- of number, you diminish the responsibility of the judg tween ourselves and foreign powers; the whole classes; it being a maxim with him in politics, that, in proporof admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, embracing the tion to the increase of numbers in those who are to exwhole of our external and much too of the internal com- ercise authority, is the decrease of responsibility to those merce of this widely extended empire; including all who delegate it. the rights of peace and war. These may be called its In reply to this objection, Mr. President, it may be judicial powers; and, vast and comprehensive as they safely admitted, that responsibility is a principle of great are in their details and in the aggregate, what are they weight and importance in the delegation of political compared with that vast political power which is wield- power. That there is much, too, in the responsibility of ed by this tribunal in its character of judge? and judge Judges to the depositors of the powers which they may in the last resort between the State and Federal Go- be disposed to abuse; that in this responsibility is revernments, in all the great and complicated questions of garded the honor, the conscience, the reputation of the constitutional law, arising from the mutual action of the Judge; the awful sanctions under which he acts; his State and Federal authorities on each other. It is the amenability to human tribunals by impeachment; to exercise of the powers of this latter class, Mr. President, the people from whom he derives his power, and for which, in our complicated system of Federal and State whose good he ought to exercise it. That after all that authorities, the most transcendent jurisdiction with could be asked or conceded to this principle in the conwhich human tribunal was ever vested. It is in this stitution of these tribunals, however beautiful or valuacharacter of judge and of mediator too, for they should ble the principle in theory may appear, it requires but be united, between the conflicting powers of Federal and little reflection or observation to convince us, that, from State sovereignties, each sovereign and uncontrollable the unfrequency of attempts to bring to any practical when acting within its legitimate sphere, that, poising beneficial result by impeachment and removal from ofthe scale of even-handed Justice, this august tribunal fice of the Judge who shall have violated any of these holds in its hands the destinies of this mighty nation: solemn sanctions; and the total inadequacy of such a in which it stands as arbiter between the nations; and result in case of conviction, to afford redress or compenit is at the foot of this tribunal that the constitution and sation for the injury inflicted on the individual or the laws of every state in this Union may be brought for community, that it is not to this principle of responsibili final adjudication, and before which they may be prosty we are to look as that of primary importance in the trated. organization of the judicial power as the means of secur And it is by the wise, mild, and guiding influence of ing those vital and essential benefits which a wise and this solemn tribunal, that the State Governments, re- happy organization of this important tribunal is calculatvolving in the political, like the planets around the great ed to insure to the citizens of this nation. No, Mr. Presource of heat and light in the natural world, are to be sident, it is not to the responsibility of the Judges of this preserved, as by an attractive or centripetal force from tribunal, vast and weighty as that responsibility is thought flying off, by some temporary or transient disorder in its to be, that you are to look mainly for the wisdom, equi movements, from its regular orbit; and, by its aberration ty, and justice of its decisions. It is to the wisdom, it is from the path prescribed by the constitution, producing to the extensive, diversified, and profound knowledge, confusion and dismay, if not ruin and destruction, in this political, judicial, as well as municipal, of the constitubeautiful but complicated system of our political union. tion and laws, not only of the United States, but each When we therefore view, as we should do, Mr. Presi- and every state composing this Union; with all their dídent, the vast and complicated powers of this tribunal, for versities, as created and modified by climate, by educathe purpose of ascertaining the more perfect organization tion, by habits, by interest, and a thousand other causes. of which it is susceptible,for the more perfect accomplish- It is to this knowledge, to be acquired by all the means of ment of its various functions, the sure and great deside-reading, observation, experience, and practice, and to ratum is, that it be so constituted, as to bring within its the virtue of your Judges, more than to their responsibi reach and in the possession of its members, that know-lity, that you are to look for all those benefits and all ledge, not only of the constitutions and the statutory regulations, but the unwritten as well as the written laws, together with the customs, usages, and even the manners and habits, various and diversified as they are known to be, of the four and twenty states, which constitute our great and extended confederation. For, if these Judges possess the power, and no one denies they have, of declaring, as null and void, and sweeping from the statute book of all and every state of this Union, not only any one law, but whole systems of laws which may be deemed by them to come in contact or collision with the constitution, laws, treaties, or authorities of the United States, or even with certain principles of ethics, or the penal code, the sanctions of which are placed under the guarantee of the Federal Constitution; in this view of the powers of this tribunal, we are called upon to say, whether ten Judges, of which number the bill on your table proposes that Court shall hereafter be composed, is too large a one for the attainment of the great purposes of

its institution.

The gentleman from Virginia, most remote on my left, (Mr. TAZEWELL,) insists that the number of which that tribunal is now composed, is too large; that he would desire to see it less; and objects, too, to increase to the number ten, because it being an even number requires more than a majority of a single Judge to reverse the judgment of an inferior tribunal; and to the principle VOL. I.-39

those blessings which may be destined to flow, as the inheritance of unborn millions, from the enlightened and correct exposition of the constitutions and laws of this Union, and of the states of which it is composed. The great desideratum in the members of this tribunal, acknowledged on all hands to be so important, is a knowledge, perfect and complete, of the constitutions, the laws, statutory as well as the common law, the unwritten as well as that which is written, with the various customs and usages of the different states of the Union, as well as of the numerous judicial decisions of the state tribunals, by which certain fixed constructions and interpretations have been given to the constitution and laws of each. How is this knowledge, so essential, so indispensable, to be obtained? And is this mass of information upon points so essential to the discharge of the judicial functions in the distribution of justice in individual controversies, and of such infinite consequence to the happiness, prosperity, and harmony of the Union, more easily to be acquired by a small number of Judges, composing this tribunal, created within the favorite precincts of this ten miles square, employed in the exercise of ap pellate functions only; or by a number of Judges equal to that proposed by the present bill, discharging not only those appellate duties, as under the present system, but also traversing by sections as allotted amongst them, every portion of this widely extended empire; some one

Senate.]

On the Judiciary.

of them passing into and presiding in the National tribunal in every state, and thus, by constant observation, successive experience, by the arguments of enlightened counsel, reared and educated in the bosom of the states respectively, as well as from daily social intercourse, making constant and successive acquisitions from the highest source, from the fountain head, and, from thence communicating to their brethren of this bench, a complete and perfect knowledge of the code of each individual state, with all the diversities and modifications of each. And it is in this mode alone, that the Judges of your Supreme Tribunal are to continue, as they have heretofore, in the active and constant discharge of their functions of Judges of the courts of original jurisdiction, by presiding in the Circuit Courts, that they will come imbued with a knowledge of the constitutions, laws, and usages of the several states, the history of their birth, the causes of those successive changes, the objects of the modifications which they may have successively undergone, and the sense which has been assigned by successive adjudications of the tribunals of the states, by the interpretations which they have given to the various clauses of those laws and constitutions which have for ages constituted the safeguard of the citizen, the guarantee of all his rights, and which contains the charter of all his civil liberties.

FEB. 16, 1825.

censure, what he chose to consider as an assault on the dignity or purity of the members of this bench. Now, for myself, Mr. President, I must confess, that to my mind, there was nothing in the remark of the honorable gentleman from Maine, calculated to excite the ire, or to call for rebuke from the more fastidious advocate for decorum in debate, as regards the dignity of this body to whom it was addressed, or incompatible with either the dignity or purity of the members of the dignified tribunal to whom the remark referred.

It is most true, that the Supreme Court of the United States as the head of one of the great departments of our free and happy government, deserves, and should receive all that personal respect and regard which their exalted situation is calculated to inspire. But it is equal. ly true, that it is essential to the freedom of debate in a legislative body, vested with powers, and clothed with solemn duties, so to model and organize this tribunal as to adapt it, in the best manner possible, to the correct exercise of these important duties, for which it was designed by the constitution, to speak of it as it is, and with a decent, though respectful freedom.

In discharge of this high and solemn duty, I must take leave to repeat the question asked by the honorable Senator from Maine, Whether there is not some cause to apprehend that, if divested of all original jurisdiction, and dispensed from the exercise of functions which require the Judges to pass into, and preside in the tribunals of original jurisdiction within the respective states, and for the exercise of the appellate powers with which they are invested, limited to the range, and placed within the attractions of this favorite ton miles square, the seat of national splendor and national power-a spirit, a little too national, may not be imbibed by the members of this tribuna, august and dignified as it is? The vast and transcendent powers and jurisdiction of this court, with the importance of a correct, enlightened, and impartial exercise of those powers, to the future peace, happiness, and prosperity, of our Union, has been briefly hinted at, but not the singularly important and delicate position which this tribunal occupies, as the judge and mediator in all conflicts and collisions be tween the powers of National and State sovereignties, between whom it is so important to the prosperity and happiness of all, that the scales of Justice between them should be poised by the most even hand; yet it is obvious, from the very nature and organization of this tribunal, deriving its existence, the appointment of its Judges, from one of those powers, the Government of the nation, that power from which all its honors flow-from whom the emoluments and rewards of office are receiv

All this information, so difficult in the acquisition, so complicated in its thousand details, so difficult, so im possible of access at the seat of Government, my honorable friend, (Mr. BARBOUR,) seems to think may be ac. quired through the medium of the counsel at the bar, who will follow the causes from the states in which the controversies originate, to the bar of this Court, for final adjudication. But the slightest reflection will satisfy my friend himself, that this source of information, on topics of which it is so indispensable that the Court should be fully and well informed, is of all others the most defective and fallacious. But suppose that neither the magnitude of the cause, or the circumstances of the parties, will jus tify the employment of any counsel either at home or abroad; or suppose that counsel on one side only is sent from the state from which the appeal is brought for an adjudication, which in its consequences may affect the interests or touch the liberties or franchises of the citizens of the whole state; then, in such a case, are the Judges of this tribunal limited in the exercise of their judicial functions to the boundaries of this magic circle, within the ten miles square. Where is he to find the clue to guide him through the labyrinth of complicated laws, perhaps obscurely penned; in phraseology of ambiguous or doubtful meaning, which he is then for the first time called upon to adjudicate, an utter stranged-and to which all its responsibilities, as recognized er? The most virtuous, enlightened, and upright Judge, thus circumstanced, must feel embarrassment and dismay; exposed to fall into error and mistake; and from which neither the books in his own, or the public library here, or any other source of information within his reach, will afford him means to escape.

by the constitution, are due. Is there not, Mr. President, in the very origin and organization of this tribunal, if not a radical defect, at least enough to justify every wise and cautious statesman, so to regulate the duties of the members of this tribunal, as to correct, as far as prae. ticable, any apprehended bias resulting from the nature But, in opposition to the proposition of my honorable and organization of this tribunal, by such regulations as friend from Virginia, my honorable friend from Maine, wisdom may prescribe, or long experience suggest? who sits before me, (Mr. HOLMES,) ventured, in a pass- And how can this object, so desirable, be promoted with ing remark or two, to suggest, that the Judges of this more success than by the organization of the present august tribunal were sufficiently national, as he feared judicial system of the United States, by which the already, as evidenced by the tenor of their recent adju-Judges, in discharge of their fanctions of Circuit Judges, dications, touching this delicate and important topic of their jurisdiction, the collision between the National and State authorities; and ventured to suggest his fears, that an entire separation of the functions and duties now exercised by the Judges of the Supreme Court, as Judges of the Circuit Courts residing in the several states, agreeably to the projet under consideration, was not calculated to render those Judges less national in their sentiments and opinions on this important branch of their jurisdiction. At this suggestion, my honorable friend takes fire, and reprobates in terms of the severest

are compelled, in their allotted circuits, to visit all the various states of our extensive Union, and in the discharge of their judicial functions, as well as the social intercourse which dwells with the citizens and inbabitants, preserves in the bosoms of the Judges of this tri. bunal, sentiments and feelings connected, in some degree, with the just pride, the sovereignty, and constitutional independence of the states? The feelings and recollections of these may not always remain so vivid in the breasts of judges permanently residing within the bosom of no particular state, but within a peculiar do