Page:The Supreme Court in United States History vol 1.djvu/177

Rh whatever that is, must have its effect. By the 19th Article, it is declared that French vessels. . . may, on any urgent necessity, enter our ports, and be supplied with all things needful for repairs. In the present case, the privateer only underwent a repair ; and the mere replacement of her force cannot be a material augmentation; even if an augmentation of force could be deemed (which we do not decide) a sufficient cause for restitution."* One further noted case was on the docket for argument at this Term; but, fortunately for the stability of the young Government, it was continued. This was the case of Hunter v. Fairfax's Devisee^ 3 Dallas, 305, which involved the bitterly fought questions of the right of an alien to take land in Virginia by devise and the right of Virginia to confiscate alien-enemy land. Its decision, twenty years later, produced a direct conflict between the State and the United States Judiciary, and had it been decided in 1796, when the Federal Government was weakened by bitter factional dissension, a similar conflict might have had serious results. The immediate subject of the suit was 788 acres of land, which had been confiscated by Virginia and granted to David Hunter, but its decision would affect the title to about 300,000 acres previously owned by the late Lord Fairfax. The lower Court having decided against Hunter, an appeal had been taken to the United States Supreme Court, and Hunter wrote to Alexander Hamilton, July 7, 1796, asking him to appear as counsel and offering him a fee of $400, to

^ The case of Jones v. LeTombe, 8 Dallas, S84, may be noted as one of the few actioDB ever brought originally in the Supreme Court, under the clause of the Constitution giving to that Court original jurisdiction in cases involving *' ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls." It was a "capias in case" against the French Consul-General. A rule was issued to the plaintiff to show his cause of action; and the plaintiff producing his paper and affidavit, it appeared that the suit was against the Frendi Government and the rule was made absolute. See opinion of Attorney-General Lee, Nov. 21, 1797, Ops. AUys.'Chn,, I,