Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/790

 ■780 William E. Dodd seemed to Roane a usurpation of power. Southern leaders of opinion had frequently denied the authority of the national courts to determine the constitutionality of an act of Congress.^ It was indeed an important matter. No court in Europe wielded such supreme power. Marshall had himself in the A'irginia Convention of 1788 declared that such powers were not contemplated in the proposed national constitution." But he evidently came to the con- clusion later that the " fathers " had intentionally left some of these points vague. He was now firmly convinced that the exercise of per- manent powers must be conceded to some branch of the national government. The " Maryland " opinion was then an enunciation of the doctrine of the court on the " implied powers " of the Constitu- tion and the right of the court, already asserted in Marbiiry z: Aladison, to interpret and apply acts of Congress. Roane had probably helped Marshall to this view of the func- tions of the national Supreme Court, for he had won fame for him- self in 1792 by delivering the opinion that the Supreme Court of Virginia possessed authority to interpret and apply the constitution and laws of the state, declaring the latter void if necessary. During and immediately after the Revolution this final and revisionary power was assumed by the courts of North Carolina, New Jersey, Virginia and Rhode Island. Long before 1815 it was regarded as a settled feature in the governments of many of the states. How easy must it have been then for judges of the national courts, reasoning by analogy, to claim and exercise the same authority in respect to the national constitution and laws. This was seen and openly admitted to be right and proper by some of Jefferson's most influential states-rights followers. There was no way for Roane judicially to review the McCuUoch V. Maryland opinion, as there had been in the former case ; but nothing daunted he took up his pen in the Enquirer, under the pseudonym of " Amphictyon " in March and under that of " Hamp- den " in June, 1819. In these papers Roane took the ground of the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions, quoting in extenso from those documents and declaring that if Marshall's view held, the " rights and freedom of the people of the states " were lost, and that it might be necessary for Virginia to employ physical force. ^ He aroused much excitement in Virginia and the discussion went ^Letter of John Steele, influential Southern Federalist, to Nathaniel Macon. April 2, 1803, in Dodd, Life of Macon. 184; also opinion of Charles Pinckney in Thayer, John Marshall, 66. "Elliot, Debates, III. 555-557. '^Branch Historical Papers. II. i. 76: also Resolutions introduced in the 'ir- ginia Assembly, December, 1819.