Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/791

 Chief Justice MarsJiall and llrginia 781 steadily on until late in the summer. A significant complaint was that the United States Supreme Court which had been supposed to be Republican in sentiment had proven to be a bulwark of the new Federalism.' Roane sent copies of his articles to Jefferson and ^ladison asking at the same time for a public expression of their opinions. Madison declined to give a positive view ; Jefferson endorsed heartily all Roane said characterizing the decision of the Supreme Court in McCullocli z: Maryland as a usurpation, but he begged to be excused from participating " in all contests of opinion ".^ Mon- roe who had half endorsed the attitude of Roane in Hunter z Martin's Lessee was also appealed to, but of course he could not as president openly express an opinion. Chief Justice ^larshall was aroused by these bitter attacks, lie said in a letter to Story a few days after Roane's first article appeared : ^ " Our opinion in the Bank case has aroused the sleeping spirit of Virginia, if indeed it ever sleeps." And again on Alay 27 : " The opinion in the Bank case continues to be denounced by the democracy in Mrginia. An effort is certainly making to induce the legislature which will meet in December to take up the sub- ject and to pass resolutions not very unlike those which were called forth by the alien and sedition laws." In view of the influence and pressure Mrginia might bring to bear upon the leaders of other state*, he exhorted his friends to exert themselves to get counter resolutions endorsing the position of the Supreme Court adopted. For, he insisted, if Roane's principles should prevail, " the consti- tution would be converted into the old confederation ". JMarshall's friends did not bestir themselves. The politicians and newspapers, especially of 'irginia, turned their guns on another " usurper ", General Jackson, whose high-handed measures in Florida produced wide-spread discussion, and the pressure on the Supreme Court was relieved. It was but a short two years, however, before another decision (.>f the Supreme Court set Roane's pen in motion. This time it would appear that Marshall had with " malice aforethought " dragged the state of Mrginia, contrary to the eleventh amendment to the Constitution, before the bar of his court. It was in the case of Cohens v. the State of J'irginia. Two points were at issue: (i) the validity of a state law prohibiting the sale of lottery- ^Roane's fourth article in the Richmond £H i?r for June 22: also in Branch Historical Pafers. II. i, 118. 2 Jefferson, Writings, X. 140-142. 'Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical ^'orit'^v. second series, XIV. 324. AM. HIST. REV., VOL. XII. — Si.