Page:A Historic Judicial Controversy and Some Reflections (Gregory, 1913).djvu/12

190 trusts committed to it, if offenses against its laws could not have been punished without the consent of the state in which the culprit was found."

After an elaborate and lucid exposition of the nature and importance of the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States, he expresses his view of the gravity of the case in these words:

""We are sensible that we have extended the examination of these decisions beyond the limits required by any intrinsic difficulty in the questions. But the decisions in question were made by the Supreme Judicial Tribunal of the State; and when a court so elevated in its position has pronounced a judgment which, if it could be maintained, would subvert the very foundations of this government, it seemed to be the duty of this court, when exercising its appellate power, to show plainly the grave errors into which the state court has fallen, and the consequences to which they would inevitably lead.""

He concluded by declaring the Fugitive Slave law to be constitutional in all is provisions.

Thereafter, the United States attorney asked in the Supreme Court of Wisconsin that the mandates in these cases be filed. The judges of that court who heard the cases were none of them on the bench; and Byron Paine, counsel for Booth, was one of the new judges and, of course, disqualified. The other two judges divided in opinion, and hence, as no order allowing these motions could be made, they were denied.

In February following Booth was arrested on a warrant issued on the judgment against him, and again applied to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin for habeas corpus. Judge was, of course, disqualified in this case; and the other two judges, differing, as indicated, no order could be made and the writ was refused. President Buchanan afterwards pardoned Booth.

This recital demonstrates how completely the Supreme Court of a state attempted to nullify and defy Federal authority.

To complete the picture, it should be also stated that when the decision of the Supreme Court at Washington was announced, the Legislature of Wisconsin adopted the following resolutions:—

", The Supreme Court of the United States has assumed appellate jurisdiction in the matter of the petition of S. M. Booth for a writ of habeas corpus, * * * and