Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 07.pdf/45

 24

the controversy were a man of '76, and two vania can possess no Constitutional right to women who had inherited the lawsuit, but resist the legal process which may be di the real contestants were the State of Penn rected in this case. It will be readily con ceived that the order which this Court is sylvania and the United States. For five years no process was issued upon enjoined to make by the high obligations of the decree entered by Judge Peters, because, duty and of law, is not made without ex as he himself stated, for prudential reasons treme regret at the necessity which has in he deemed it best to withhold it, so as to duced the application. But it is a solemn avoid embroiling the government of the duty, and therefore must be performed. A United States and that of Pennsylvania. peremptory mandamus must be awarded." 1 Rallying his energies There could be for a supreme and but little doubt as to final effort, Olmsted the result, when John applied, in 1808, to Marshall sounded the Supreme Court such a note, but the of the United States State still maintained for a mandamus, an attitude of defi which was awarded ance. Judge Peters by Chief Justice issued his writ, but Marshall, in one of when service of the his characteristic attachment was at judgments. "With tempted, the marshal great attention and found the house of serious concern " he Mrs. Sergeant and examined the ques Mrs. Waters, at the tion of jurisdiction, corner of Seventh and after a calm but and Arch Streets, convincing course of long known as " Fort reasoning in support Rittenhouse," sur of Federal power, he rounded by the State solemnly declared, militia under the command of General "If the Legislatures of the several States Bright, who had been JAMES MADISON. may at will annul the called out by Gov judgments of the Courts of the United ernor Snyder with the sanction of the States, and destroy the rights acquired Legislature, in fulfilment of their pledge of under those judgments, the Constitution protection. In vain did the marshal read itself becomes a solemn mockery, and the his commission and his warrant, and add a speech on the duty of obedience; every nation is deprived of the means of en forcing its laws by the instrumentality of its effort to enter the house was resisted by own tribunals. So fatal a result must be pointed bayonets. He withdrew for a time, but fixed that deprecated by all; and the people of Penn sylvania, not less than the citizens of every day three weeks for the service of the war other State, must feel a deep interest in rant, and summoned a posse-comitatus of two resisting principles so destructive of the thousand men. Bloodshed was imminent, Union, and in averting consequences so fatal and the City of Philadelphia was torn by the to themselves. . . ." " The State of Pennsyl 1 United States v. Peters, 5 Cranch, 115.