National Government ** or of the exercise of its constitu-
tional powers, would at least render it possible for the
party in power to use the Courts as an engine of polit-
ical persecution; and it was deeply abhorrent to the
views of those who believed that the powers of the
Government were restricted to the express grants of the
Constitution. It was with considerable reason, there-
fore, that widespread apprehensions were expressed at
this doctrine, "It has long been feared that the
Government of the United States tended to a consoli-
dation," a correspondent wrote in the Virginia Argus^
"and consolidation would generate monarchy • Noth-
ing can so soon produce the first as the establishment of
the doctrine that the common law of England is the
law of the United States ; it renders the State Govern-
ments useless burthens ; it gives the Federal Govern-
ment and its Courts jurisdiction over every subject
that has hitherto been supposed to belong to the States ;
instead of the General Government being instituted
for particular purposes, it embraces every subject to
which government can apply . . . ; the whole range of
legislation and jurisprudence is within its omnipotent
grasp/' ^ This doctrine was, moreover, regarded by the
Anti-Federalists as merely a portion of the general
plan of the Federalist party to control the Judiciary ;
and its support by the Judiciary was considered merely
further evidence of their devotion to Federalism.
- Judges would not introduce so novel, so important and
extensively dangerous doctrine unless they were well assured it was pleasing to and would be supported by the Government," wrote Charles Pinckney.' Jefferson, writing to Pinckney, expressed his views of the obnoxious jurisdiction so asserted by the Courts, as follows :
^ Virgima Argus, Aug. 9, 1799.
- CharluUm Ci^ QaattU (S. C), Oct 6» 1800, letter aigned "Republican."
