sion be directed, authorizing me to exercise the office of a judge in chancery, in any case whatever, I shall then have it in my power to exercise the right of every other free man,-to accept or refuse,-though I have no difficulty in declaring, were the appointment perfect, that I might hold during good behaviour, I should have no objection to enter upon the discharge of those new duties; but until that it is done, in justice to the public, whose rights are concerned, and to myself, as an individual, I must decline the duty prescribed by the law in question, not being as yet such a judge in chancery as the people have said shall exercise that kind of jurisdiction.

Of course, my opinion is that the district court of Dumfries be advised to over-rule the motion for an injunction in this cause.

JUDGE TYLER. I am saved much trouble in the investigation of this case, by the gentlemen whose opinions have been already delivered with so much propriety and sound reason, as it respects the question of the validity of the Constitution.

It is truly painful to me to be under the necessity of saying any thing in support of it at this day; but since I am reduced to this necessity, I must be indulged with a few observations on the subject.

I know it has been the opinion of some critical and speculative gentlemen of considerable merit and abilities too, that our form of government was not authorised by the people, inasmuch as no instructions were given by the people to the convention at the time the Constitution was established.

To investigate this subject rightly, we need but go back to that awful period of our country when we were declared out of the protection of the then mother country —and take a retrospective view of our situation, and behold the bands of civil government cut asunder, and destroyed: No social compact, no system of protection and common defence against an invading tyrant-in a state of nature, without friends, allies, or resources:-In such a case what was to be done?

Those eminent characters to whom so much gratitude is, and for ever will be due-whose names are enrolled in the annals of America, recommended a convention of delegates to be chosen for that purpose; who were to meet together for the express design of completely protecting and defending the rights, both civil and religious, of our common country.-The delegates were so elected and convened. What power had the people therefore that was not confided to their representatives? All their rights, all their power, all their happiness, all their hopes

H

and prospects of success, were most indubitably entrusted to their care. They were not betrayed.-The people did not say to their representatives, so far shall ye go, and no farther.-Happy, indeed, for this country, that no such restraint was laid on them.

In order to protect and defend the common cause then, a system of social duties was formed.-Without this what obedience could have been expected, and how could a regular defence have been made?

A great variety of departments were established, and those who were to execute them must have been made responsible to some regular power:-And all this was to complete the great work of liberty.

Has not this policy been sufficiently ratified by time and action? And if it were possible to doubt, under these circumstances, has it not been sealed with the blood of this wide extended empire? And shall its validity be now questioned? for what purpose? To revert back to our former insignificancy? It cannot be.

Before I proceed to say any thing on the adjourned case now under contemplation, I will beg leave to make a few observations on the opinion that some gentlemen have taken up, of the impropriety of the judiciary in de

ciding against a aw which is in contradiction to the Constitution.

A little time and trouble bestowed on this subject, I am sure, would enable any person, endowed with common understanding, to see the fallacy of such sentiments.

What is the Constitution but the great contract of the people, every individual whereof having sworn allegiance to it? A system of fundamental principles, the violation of which must be considered as a crime of the highest magnitude. That this great and paramount law should be faithfully and rightfully executed, it is divided into three departments, to wit: the legislative, the executive, and judiciary, with an express restraint upon all, so that neither shall encroach on the rights of the other.—In the Bill of Rights many things are laid down, which are reserved to the people-trial by jury, on life and death, liberty of conscience, &c. Can the legislature rightfully pass a law taking away these rights from the people? Can the judiciary pass sentence without a conviction of a citizen by twelve of his peers? Can the executive do any thing forbidden by this bill of rights, or the constitution? In short, can one branch of the government call upon another to aid in the violation of this sacred letter? The answer to these questions must be in the negative.

But who is to judge of this matter? the legislature only? I hope not. The object of all governments is and ought to be, the faithful administration of justice.-It cannot, I hope, be less the object of our goverment, which has been founded on principles very different from any we read of in the world, as it has ingrafted in it a better knowledge of the rights of human nature, and the means of better securing those rights.—And were I inclined to borrow a sentiment from any man, in support of my opinion, (not as authority, but merely argumentative) I should make use of the following one from the celebrated Hume, in his essay on our government,-viz. “We are "therefore to look upon all the vast apparatus of our go"vernment, as having ultimately no other object, or pur"pose, but the distribution of justice, or in other words, "the support of the judges. King, and parliaments, heads "and armies, officers of the court and revenue, ambassa"dors, ministers, and privy-counsellers, are all subordi"nate in their end to this part of administration.”— Hence it may reasonably be inferred, that if the commonwealth itself is subordinate to this department of government at times, so therefore will necessarily be the acts of the legislature, when they shall be found to violate first principles, notwithstanding the supposed "omnipotence "of parliament," which is an abominable insult upon the honour and good sense of our country, as nothing is omnipotent as it relates to us, either religious or political, but the God of Heaven and our constitution!