The Life of John Marshall, Volume 3: Conflict and construction, 1800-1815. Beveridge Albert Jeremiah

The Life of John Marshall, Volume 3: Conflict and construction, 1800-1815 - Beveridge Albert Jeremiah


Скачать книгу
id="n280">

280

Hist. Last Sess. Cong. Which Commenced 7th Dec. 1801 (taken from the National Intelligencer), 71.

281

Tucker: Life of Thomas Jefferson, ii, 114.

282

Washington Federalist, March 3, 1802. Too much importance cannot be attached to this editorial. It undoubtedly expressed accurately the views of Federalist public men in the Capital, including Marshall, whose partisan views and feelings were intense. It should not be forgotten that his relations with this newspaper were believed to be intimate. (See vol. ii, 532, 541, of this work.)

283

Plumer to Upham, March 1, 1802, Plumer MSS. Lib. Cong.

284

March 12, 1802.

285

March 23, 1802.

286

March 15, 1802.

287

Vans Murray to King, April 5, 1802, King, iv, 95.

288

Sedgwick to King, Feb. 20, 1802, ib. 73.

289

Ames to Dwight, April 16, 1802, Ames, i, 297.

290

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 201.

291

Ib. 205.

292

Ib. 257.

293

They never occupied the bench under the Federalist Act of 1801. They were appointed, but the swift action of Jefferson and the Republicans prevented them from entering upon the discharge of their duties.

294

This case was before the Supreme Court in December, 1801, and, ordinarily, would have been decided at the next term, June, 1802.

295

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 1228-29.

296

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 1229.

297

Ib. 1229-30.

298

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 1235-36.

299

Ib. 1236. See also Channing, U.S. iv, 280-81.

300

See vol. ii, 62, of this work.

301

Ames to Gore, Dec. 13, 1802, Ames, i, 310.

302

Ib. Here is another characteristic passage from Ames, who accurately expressed New England Federalist sentiment: "The second French and first American Revolution is now commencing… The extinction of Federalism would be followed by the ruin of the wise, rich, and good." (Ames to Smith, Dec. 14, 1802, ib. 313-16.)

303

Pickering to Peters, Dec. 24, 1803, New-England Federalism: Adams, 338.

304

Cabot to King, March 27, 1802, King, iv, 94.

305

Columbian Centinel, April 7, 1802.

306

"Bowling" in the Independent Chronicle of April 26, 1802. An example of Jefferson's amazing skill in directing public opinion is found in the fact that the people were made to feel that the President was following in Washington's footsteps.

307

Marshall to his wife, Jan. 2, 1803, MS.

308

See vol. ii, 502-05, of this work.

309

Marshall to King, May 5, 1802, King, iv, 116-18.

310

Since the adoption of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798. (See vol. ii, chaps. x, xi, xii, of this work.)

311

Since the Republican repeal of the Federalist Judiciary Act was proposed. See supra, 51.

312

Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island.

313

The Federalist majority in Vermont resolved that: "It belongs not to State Legislatures to decide on the constitutionality of laws made by the general government; this power being exclusively vested in the Judiciary Courts of the Union." (Records of Governor and Council of Vermont, iv, 529.)

The Federalist majority in the Maryland Legislature asserted that "no state government … is competent to declare an act of the federal government unconstitutional, … that jurisdiction … is exclusively vested in the courts of the United States." (Anderson, in Am. Hist. Rev. v, 248.)

The New York Federalists were slow to act, but finally resolved "that the right of deciding on the constitutionality of all laws passed by Congress … appertains to the judiciary department." (Ib. 248-49.)

Connecticut Federalists declared that the Kentucky and Virginia plan was "hostile to the existence of our national Union." (Ib. 247.)

In Delaware the then dominant party decided that the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were "not a fit subject" for their consideration. (Ib. 246.)

The Pennsylvania Federalist majority resolved that the people "have committed to the supreme judiciary of the nation the high authority of ultimately and conclusively deciding the constitutionality of all legislative acts." (Anderson, in Am. Hist. Rev. v, 245.)

On February 8, 1799, Massachusetts replied to the Virginia Resolutions that: "This legislature are persuaded that the decision of all cases in law or equity, arising under the Constitution of the United States, and the construction of all laws made in pursuance thereof, are exclusively vested by the people in the Judicial Courts of the U. States." (Mass. Senate Journal, 1798-99, xix, 238, MS. volume Mass. State Library.)

Such was the general tenor of the Federalists' pronouncements upon this grave problem. But because the people believed the Sedition Law to be directed against free speech, the Federalist supremacy in many of the States that insisted upon these sound Nationalist principles was soon overthrown.

The resolutions of the Republican minorities in the Legislatures of the Federalist States were emphatic assertions that any State might declare an act of Congress unconstitutional and disregard it, and that the National Judiciary did not have supervisory power over legislation.

314

See vol. ii, 387-89, of this work.

315

Referring to Marshall's conduct in the French Mission. (See vol. ii, chaps. vii, viii, ix, of this work.)

316

Anderson, in Am. Hist. Rev. v, 249.

317

Ib. 235-37.

318

The questions raised by the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions were principal themes of debate in State Legislatures, in the press, in Congressional campaigns, and in the Presidential contest of 1800. The Judiciary debate of 1802 was, in part, a continuance of these popular discussions.

319

See supra, 52.

320

Within a year after Marbury vs. Madison was decided, Albert Moore, one of the Federalist Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, resigned because of ill health and his place was filled by William Johnson, a Republican of South Carolina.

321

See vol. i, 410, of this work.

322

March 2, 1801.

323

Journal of the Executive Proceedings of the Senate, i, 388.

324

Ib. 390.

325

Ib. 404. Jefferson did this because, as he said, the appointees of Adams were too numerous.

326

Journal, Exec. Proc. Senate, i, 417.

Скачать книгу