tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law," applies to cases coming to the Supreme Court of the United States from the highest courts of the States in which facts have been found by a jury. Chicago, B. & Q. R'y v. Chicago, 166 U. S., 226.

The Act of 1850, c. 51 (9 Stat. at L., 453, 458), admitting Utah as a territory, enacted "that the Constitution and laws of the United States are hereby extended over and declared to be in force in said Territory of Utah, so far as the same or any provision thereof may be applicable." A later act of Congress (18 Stats. at L., 27), confirmed the statutes of various territories "so far as they authorized a uniform course of proceeding in all cases whether legal or equitable, provided, that no party has been or shall be deprived of the right of trial by jury in cases cognizable at common law." While such was the state of the law a territorial statute providing that a verdict in civil cases might be rendered by nine or more members of the jury, was held invalid, as contravening the Seventh Amendment. Am. Pub. Co. v. Fisher, 166 U. S., 464. This implies that the substance as well as the form of a jury trial should be preserved. Walker v. South. Pac. R. R. Co., 165 U. S., 593.

ARTICLE VIII.

EXCESSIVE BAIL AND CRUEL PUNISHMENTS PROHIBITED.

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

What are excessive fines, cruel or unusual punishments. The provision that "excessive fines shall not be imposed nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" applies to National not State legislation. Pervear v. Mass., 5 Wall., 475.

A fine of $50 and imprisonment at hard labor for three months as punishment for selling liquor without license, would not be deemed an excessive fine, nor a cruel or unusual punishment. Pervear v. Mass., 5 Wall., 475.

The statute of New York which provides for capital punishment by electricity is not forbidden by this section. In re Kemmler, 136 U. S., 436.

The statute of Utah, while a territory, provided for punishment of capital offenses by shooting, hanging or beheading, giving option to the convict as to the mode he would select. Held, he could be sentenced under this act, and the court can direct the mode where the prisoner does not make the selection. Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U. S., 130. This statute of March 6, 1852, held not repealed by later act. Id.

The adoption of the 14th Amendment does not make

all the provisions of the first ten amendments operative in the State courts. Maxwell v. Dow, 176 U. S., 581.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution, commonly known as the Bill of Rights, were not intended to lay down any novel principles of government, but simply embodied certain guaranties and immunities, which we had inherited from our English ancestors; and which had from time immemorial, been subject to certain well recognized exceptions. It was not intended in adopting these amendments to disregard the exceptions, which have always been recognized as if formally expressed. The power to arrest deserting seamen in the merchant service and deliver them on board their vessel, is not a part of the "judicial power," and Congress can confer it on justices of the peace, without violation of the ten amendments, or Sections 1 and 2 of Article III, conferring judicial power, nor the 13th Amendment. Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U. S., 275.

ARTICLE IX.

ENUMERATED POWERS NO DENIAL OF OTHERS RETAINED

BY PEOPLE.

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

The State of Pennsylvania having liens upon the lands of its debtors by judgments and other proceedings passed a special act subjecting the lands to sale on pro

cess to be issued by the Governor, to satisfy the debts, there being no other mode under the laws then existing to satisfy the debts. It was contended that this law violated the 9th Amendment, as well as the 6th and 7th, but the answer of the court was that those amendments did not apply to the States. Livingston's Lessee v. Moore, 7 Pet., 469.

"The most cursory glance at these articles discloses a unity of purpose, when taken in connection with the history of the times, which can not fail to have an important bearing on any question of doubt concerning their true meaning. Nor, can such doubts, when any reasonably exist, be safely and rationally solved without a reference to that history; for in it is found the occasion and necessity for recurring again to the great source of power in this country, the people of the States, for additional guaranties of human rights; additional powers to the Federal government; additional restraints upon those of the States." Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall., 36, 37.

ARTICLE X.

RESERVED POWERS.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The general government and the States, although both exist within the same territorial limits, are sepa

rate and distinct sovereignties acting separately and independently of each other within their respective spheres. The former in its appropriate sphere is supreme; but the States within the limits of their powers not granted, or, in the language of the 10th Amendment, "reserved," are as independent of the general government as that government within its sphere is independent of the States. And Congress can not under the Constitution impose a tax upon the salary of an officer of the State. Collector v. Day, 11 Wall., 113. See, Ableman v. Booth, 21 How., 506.

This provision applied in sustaining a municipal ordinance of New Orleans, which authorized the collection of wharfage. Ouichita Packet Co. v. Aiken, 121 U. S., 444. See, ante, p. 71. The ordinance was found not contrary to the Constitution or any law of the United States.

The Supreme Court in holding the act of the State of New York, which required all ships or vessels entering the port of New York to pay a certain tax per ton, void as a duty on tonnage, say that it is prohibited to the States. Inman Steamship Co. v. Tinker, 94 U. S., 238.

No mode is provided by the Constitution and laws of the United States by which a person, unlawfully abducted from one State to another, and held in the latter State upon process of law for an offense against the State, can be restored to the State from which he was ab