Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v4.djvu/653

Rh United States which declares that "no state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any impost, or duty on imports and exports, excepting what may be absolutely necessary for executing its own inspection laws;" and also to that which declares that Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. Brown et Al. v. State of Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419.

143. It is extremely doubtful whether the legislature can constitutionally impose upon a judge of the Supreme Court of the United Slates the authority or duty to hold a District Court. There is a great difference between giving new jurisdiction to a court of which such judge is a member, and appointing him pro hoc vice to a new office. Nor is there any sound distinction between an appointment to a new office, and an appointment to perform the duties of another office, while it remains a separate and distinct office. Ex parte United States, 1 Gallis. 338.

144. The act of New Hampshire of June 19, 1805, which allows to tenants the value of improvements, &c., on recoveries against them, if it applies to past improvements, is so tar unconstitutional and void. Society for the Propagation, &c. v. Wheeler et Al. 2 Gallis. 105.

145. The expressions "admiralty and maritime jurisdiction," in the Constitution of the United States, give jurisdiction of all things done upon and relating to the sea, or, in other words, all transactions and proceedings relative to commerce and navigation, and to damages or injuries upon the sea. De Corvio v. Boit et Al. 2 Gallis. 308, 468.

146. The delegation of cognizance "of all civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction" to the courts of the United States, comprehends all maritime contracts, torts, and injuries. The latter branch is necessarily bounded by locality; the former extends over all contracts, wheresoever they may be made or executed, or whatsoever may be the form of the stipulations, which relate to the navigation, business, or commerce of the sea. Ibid. 474, 475.

147. The 9th section of the 1st article of the Constitution of the United States, which restrained Congress from forbidding the migration or importation of slaves prior to the year 1808, did not apply to state legislatures, who might at any time prohibit the introduction of such persons. Butler v. Hoppen, 1 Wash. C. C. R. 499.

148. The 2d section of the 4th article of the Constitution of the United States does not extend to a slave voluntarily carried by his master into another state, and there left under the protection of a law declaring him free, but to slaves escaping from one slate into another. Ibid.

149. The powers bestowed by the Constitution upon the government of the United States were limited in their extent, and were not intended, nor can they be construed with other powers before vested in the stale governments, which of course were reserved to those governments, impliedly, as well as by an express provision of the Constitution. Golden v. Prince, 3 Wash. C. C. R. 313. 5 Hall's Am. L. Journ. 502 S. C.

150. The state governments therefore retained the right to make such laws as they might think proper within the ordinary functions of legislation, if not inconsistent with the powers vested exclusively in the government of the United States, and not forbidden by some article of the Constitution of the United Slates or of the state; and such laws were obligatory upon all the citizens of that state, as well as others who might claim rights or redress for injuries under those laws, or in the courts of that state. Ibid.

151. The establishment of federal courts, and the jurisdiction granted to them in certain specified cases, could not, consistently with the spirit and provisions of the Constitution, impair any of the obligations thus imposed by the laws of the state, by setting up in those courts a rule of decision at variance with that which was binding upon the citizens, and which they were bound to obey. Ibid.

152. Thus the laws of a state affecting contracts, regulating the disposition and transmission of property, real or personal, and a variety of others, which in themselves are free from all constitutional objections, are equally valid and obligatory within the state, since the adoption of the Constitution of the United