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

Чтение книги онлайн.

261

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 727.

262

Ib. 737. See also vol. i, 452, of this work.

263

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 747-55.

264

Ib. 759.

265

Ib. 760.

266

See infra, chap. x.

267

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 760.

268

Ib. 760.

269

See infra, chaps. iii and vi.

270

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 767-94.

[271] Ib. 793.

271

Ib. 805-06.

272

In sour disgust Morris notes in his diary: "The House of Representatives have talked themselves out of self-respect, and at headquarters [White House] there is such an abandonment of manner and such a pruriency of conversation as would reduce even greatness to the level of vulgarity." (March 10, 1802, Morris, ii, 421.)

273

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 904.

Dana's statement is of first importance and should be carefully noted. It was at the time the universally accepted view of the power of the Supreme Court to issue writs of mandamus. Neither Federalists nor Republicans had ever questioned the Constitutional right of the Supreme Court to entertain original jurisdiction of mandamus proceedings in proper cases. Yet just this was what Marshall was so soon to deny in Marbury vs. Madison. (See infra, chap. iii.)

274

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 920.

275

Ib. 923-26.

276

See supra, chap, i, 43.

277

Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 983.

278

Hildreth, v, 441.

279

Bayard to Bassett, March 3, 1802, Bayard Papers: Donnan, 150; and see Annals, 7th Cong. 1st Sess. 982. One Republican, Dr. William Eustis of Boston, voted with the Federalists.

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 СКАЧАТЬ