Page:The Supreme Court in United States History vol 1.djvu/212

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

184

THE SUPREME COURT

diminish his responsibility, sap the fundamental principles of the government. . . . The morals of the author of the letter to Mazzei cannot be pure."^[1]

The newspapers of the country showed little interest and paid very slight attention to the appointment of Marshall. A leading Federalist paper, the Columbian Centinel, published only the following comment: "The assent of the Senate to the nomination of the Hon. Mr. Marshall to be Chief Justice of the United States was unanimous. We expect the Jacobins at some future period will deny having abused this gentleman also." Of the leading Anti-Federalist papers, the Independent Chronicle noted the appointment without making any comment, and the Aurora printed only a brief sarcastic item: "The vacant Chief Justiceship is to be conferred on John Marshall, one time General, afterwards Ambassador to X, Y, Z, and for a short time incumbent of the office of Secretary of State."^[2]

When the first Term to be held in the new city of Washington opened on February 2, 1801, William Cushing was the only Judge who had arrived; accordingly, the Court was adjourned, and it was not until February 4 (after Samuel Chase of Maryland and Bushrod

↑ Hamilton (J. C. Hamilton's ed.), VI, letter of Jan. 1, 1801. It is singular that Marshall feared lest Jefferson would "weaken" the office of President, whereas the chief attack upon Jefferson by the Federalists during the next eight years was for his aggrandizement and usurpation of Executive power.
↑ Columbian Centinel, Feb. 14, 1801; Aurora, Jan. 22, 1801. The Independent Chronicle, Jan. 29, 1801, published a hostile paragraph directed at the Washington Federalist, a gazette published “under the immediate patronage of General Marshall, the Secretary of State, which discharges a great deal of low abuse at Mr. Jefferson . . . . Who would think that John Marshall, once the fervent worshipper at the altar of Liberty, would become the abuser of Jefferson. 'Tis true, 'tis pity, Pity 'tis, 'tis true." The Aurora, April 30, 1801, referred to the Washington Federalist as "set up by John Marshall and supported by his credit in the banks of the Columbian District."
James Callender, who had been indicted under the Sedition Act during President Adams' Administration for a savage diatribe on the President, wrote in the Richmond Enquirer, Feb. 6, 1801: "We are to have that precious acquisition, John Marshall, as Chief Justice. . . . The very sound of the man's name is an insult upon truth and justice."

[1] Hamilton (J. C. Hamilton's ed.), VI, letter of Jan. 1, 1801. It is singular that Marshall feared lest Jefferson would "weaken" the office of President, whereas the chief attack upon Jefferson by the Federalists during the next eight years was for his aggrandizement and usurpation of Executive power.

[2] Columbian Centinel, Feb. 14, 1801; Aurora, Jan. 22, 1801. The Independent Chronicle, Jan. 29, 1801, published a hostile paragraph directed at the Washington Federalist, a gazette published “under the immediate patronage of General Marshall, the Secretary of State, which discharges a great deal of low abuse at Mr. Jefferson . . . . Who would think that John Marshall, once the fervent worshipper at the altar of Liberty, would become the abuser of Jefferson. 'Tis true, 'tis pity, Pity 'tis, 'tis true." The Aurora, April 30, 1801, referred to the Washington Federalist as "set up by John Marshall and supported by his credit in the banks of the Columbian District."
James Callender, who had been indicted under the Sedition Act during President Adams' Administration for a savage diatribe on the President, wrote in the Richmond Enquirer, Feb. 6, 1801: "We are to have that precious acquisition, John Marshall, as Chief Justice. . . . The very sound of the man's name is an insult upon truth and justice."

[1]

[2]