Open main menu

Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/427

This page needs to be proofread.


Suptuma Comvr ofthe Uniml Smtu. 42: thority he necelTary for fo notorious a delinition, recur to r I793. Hurr. Cbnn. Prnt?. p. gg. where it is obferved, that “ intzwrw this Court," that is, in the High Court of Chancery of En- gland, •* {`uits are generally commenced, profecuted, and de- jvuhvl by partiu, in their own names only." I might appeal too to a work of greater {`olemnity, and of greater obligation; the articles of confederation. In defcribing the mode, by which ditferences between two or more States {hall be adju{ted,.thcy {peak of a day- to be alligned for the appearance of the partie: ; of each pariy alternately {hiking the names of the perfons pro- pofed as judges ; of either parly neglecting to attend; of {irik- ing names in behalf of a party abfcnt; of any of the rama:-as refuling to {`ubmit to the authority of the Court ; and of lodg- ing the {entence among the aéts of Caugrjr for the {`ecurity of the partir: concemed. Human genius might be challenged to reliriél thcfe words to a plainti{}` {tate alone. It is indeed true, that according to the order in which the controverlies of aState are mentioned, the State is the {irll.; and from thence it may be argued, that they mull: be thofe in which a State is {ir{l nam- ed, or plaintilli Nobody denies, that the citizens of aState_ may {`ue Foreign fubjeéts, or Foreign {`uhje&s the citizens of a ‘ State. And yet, the exprellion of the Conltitution is, *‘ be- tween a State or the citizens thereof, and Foreign States, citi- zens or t`uhjec°ts." The order in this inltance, works no dilie- rence. In common language too, it would not violate the {ub- {lantial idea, if acontroverly, {aid to be between A. B. and C. D. {hould appear to be between C. D. and A. B. Nay the opportunity fairly occurs in two pages of the judicial article, to confine {nits to States, as plaintiflis; but they are both ne- gleéled, notwithllanding the corrfcioulhcfs which the convention mult have po{le{li·d, that the words. unqualified, llrongly tcm]- ed at lealt to fnbjeft States as defendants. i Vith the advantage of the htm- on our {ide, let us now advert to the jjxirit of the Conllitutiou, or rather its gt·.·:u£.·u mul may- jrry inmyrremtiari. Iam aware of the danger of going into :1 wide hi{l.ory of the Conllitution, as a guide of conllruelion; and of the {till greaterdanger of laying any important llrefs up- _ on the preamble as explanatory of its powers. I refort, there- fore, to the bnlvof it; which lhews that there may be various actions of States which are to be annulled. IF, for example, a State lhallfulpend the priviledge of a writ of 1I·nbt·n.r mrpur, unlels when in cafes of rebellion or iuvalion the public {`afety may require it ;{l1onld pal`.: a bill of olmimhw or as- pffiils law; {honld enterinto any treaty, alliance, or confederation; lhould grant letters of rnarque and reprilirl ; lhuuld coin money ; {hould emit bills of credit; {hould ru.il¤: any thing but gold and lilver coin a tender in payment of debts , lhould pals a law