JAN. 18, 1830.]

Distribution of Public Lands.

[H. of R.

United States is particularly urged, among other reasons, by tem. It would retard the circulation, and suddenly all the important considerations that they are pledged as a the vital energies would become extinct.

fund for reimbursing the public debt; that, if timely and What, sir, I ask all reflecting gentlemen to say, must judiciously applied, they may save the necessity of burden-be the inevitable result? Take the public lands away ing our citizens with new taxes for the extinguishment of from the sinking fund-have a tariff sufficient to prothe principal; and that, being free to discharge the princi-hibit exportation, and I say, what, sir, is to be the result? pal, but in a limited proportion, no opportunity ought to Why, direct taxation! And, next to that, follows ruin to be lost for availing the public of its right."

. What, sir, I ask, would have been the situation of this country, if we had pursued the policy of the father of his country? Instead now of owing a debt of near fifty millions of dollars, we should have paid it years ago, and have saved the country near one hundred and fifty millions of dollars interest, which we have actually paid on the public debt since the year 1790.

the Southern States; our slaves, our land, &c. will be taken and sold to pay the tax. Importation being stopped, it necessarily prohibits exportation, and our staple being cotton, just as much as is wanted for consumption, by the manufacturing States, will be bought at their own price, and the balance will sink with us. Sir, I was not prepared to hear such language uttered on this floor. I have always had my doubts as to the sincerity of the policy; But [said Mr. S.] it has been urged why this divi-now they are confirmed. I had hoped at this session we sion should take place, that the sinking fund will, in a should so modify the American system as to unite all parvery few years, entirely reduce the public debt, and that ties; but, sir, I must confess, all hopes now are lost. The therefore this resolution should pass. He should like to gentleman from Rhode Island has gravely told us that he be informed what constituted the sinking fund. If he supposes the Union is to be divided next summer, and had understood the history of the sinking fund correct-then we shall divide. ly, he thought the money derived from the sales of the Sir, in the section of country from which I have the public lands formed a part. Mr. S. said, Congress in honor to come, I have heard no such intimation. Respecttheir wisdom had devised a plan, whereby the public debt able meetings have been held in the Southern States, in should be paid off in a few years. They had enacted (he which they have set forth their grievances, and urged a spoke at present from report, for he had never read the speedy redress. Justice, sir, is what the South. wants; law) that the sum of ten millions of dollars should annually and justice she will have. And the gentleman from be applied to the payment of the public debt, out of the Rhode Island will pardon me for telling him, that should sales of the public lands, and the duty on imports. And disunion of this empire take place, oppression and injus that, after the contingent expenses of Government had tice will be the cause. And, sir, it is lamentable, if, after been paid, the balance (reserving two millions of dollars a bloody struggle with Old England to resist a three-penfor contingencies) to be also applied. This, [said Mr. S.]ny tax per pound on tea, in which lives, property, and in a few words, was what constituted the sinking fund.treasure were sacrificed, we must now burst asunder the Now, [said Mr. S.] take away the proceeds of the public political bands of this confederacy to resist an unconstitulands, and adopt the American system, to its full extent, tional impost on the South, to support the pride and aras admitted by the gentleman from Rhode Island the other rogance of New England. Sir, I pray God, none of these day, and where is your sinking fund? The gentleman evils may befall us. I feel sorry that this subject has been has told us, in his remarks the other day, that the wish of unnecessarily lugged into this debate. But, sir, when I the friends of the American system is to furnish the coun-hear doctrines advanced on this floor, which sap the indetry with all the necessaries of life, and stop importation. pendence and liberty of the people, I feel bound to reI will give his own words: sist it. Yes, sir, regardless of consequences, I will do it.

"He would briefly glance at another objection. It was Mr. S. said he feared there was something contained in said that this was a branch of the tariff policy, and that the body of the resolution, which was not expressed on it would be supported as such by all tariff men. He the face of it. I hope, sir, it is not the result of any dewould say in three words what the advocates of the Ame-termination to further the cause of the tariff. rican system require. That system proposes to supply In regard to the amendment of the gentleman from South the country with all the great staples from our own Carolina, although he saw no very good effect it would have, sources. The importation of those staples constitutes at yet he could not agree that its intention or effect was such present the great source of our public revenue. The as had been attributed to it by the gentlemen who had friends of the American system know that, when that im- participated in the debate. He did not consider the portation shall cease, the revenue from that source must amendment as intended to raise an account current be be discontinued. He begged of the gentleman from Ala- tween the old and the new States, and that the effect bama to understand, that, when these importations shall would be to require the new States to pay back, but on cease, there will be no longer any revenue from foreign the contrary to ascertain, as near as possible, the amount goods to our Government. If, then, the importation shall they had received, and, should a division now take place, terminate, and with it the revenue, the friends of that withhold from them a proportion which they might have system must wish to keep up a revenue from the sales of received heretofore. Much [he said] had been said in rethe public lands. If, therefore, the gentleman could ima-gard to donations from the General Government to the gine that any friend of the American system would sup-States, for fortifications, &c. which, by the bye, he consiport the resolution on the ground he had stated, it was dered as foreign altogether from the subject under consimore than he [Mr. B.] could imagine. If the gentleman deration. He would ask the gentleman from Rhode Island, supposed that he [Mr. B.] and the friends who voted with if what was given to one member of the Union in a nationhim were gifted with greater obloquy of intellect, or al point of view, was not so much given to the whole. greater want of intelligence, than any other human beings, That which contributes to the defence of his State, is it was too much to accuse us of possessing both those dis- properly the defence of the whole country. This was qualifications together." the correct view, he conceived, to be taken of the subMr. S. said, he was not mistaken in his view of the ject. Now, in regard to the donations of public land made wishes of the manufacturing States. This was just what to the new States, it was wholly different. They had rehe expected they had arrived at, and he would in a very ceived a large amount of this fund from the General Govfew words call the attention of the House to what he con-ernment, for the very purposes contemplated by this resoceived would be the effect of such an oppressive policy. lution; and the amendment of the gentleman from South It would operate precisely on the Southern States, as Carolina is intended to require an account to be taken of cords and bandages would, if applied to the human sys-what they had received-not to compel them to pay back,

H. of R.]

The Judiciary.--Condition of the Indians.

[JAN. 19, 20, 1830.

"Resolved, That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the expediency of appropriating the nett annual proceeds of the sales of the public lands among the seve ral States and Territories."

TUESDAY, JANUARY 19, 1830.

The House resumed the consideration of the resolution moved by Mr. HUNT on the 17th December ultimo.

The question recurred on agreeing to that member or portion thereof, which is contained in the following words: "for the purposes of education;" and decided as follows: yeas, 98-nays, 84.

but, as he had before stated, in the division now proposed first member of the said resolution, in the following to hold back in proportion to what they have received. words, viz. He considered the donations heretofore made, just what the General Government was by the terms of the cession bound to do. It was, if not expressly implied in all the cessions, that new States were to be formed out of the territory ceded to the General Government. We held And it was decided as follows: yeas, 113-nays, 70. out inducements to our people to remove to the new So the House agreed to this clause of the resolution. lands, and "we would do them good;" and for one he did A further division on the second member of the said not feel disposed to press them. They are bone of our resolution was then called for by Mr. BUCHANAN, so bone, flesh of our flesh. They are our children. They as that the question be taken separately on so much of the have, in times of peril and danger, stood between us and said resolution as is contained in these words, “for the the tomahawk and scalping knife, for which we owe them purposes of education and internal improvement." a debt of gratitude. They have protected us. And what A further division of the question on the said second we have done for them is but a small compensation for the member of the said resolution was then called for by Mr. hardships and toils they have endured for us. I hope, sir, TAYLOR. we shall not now require them to pay us back what we And then the House adjourned. have given them. Mr. S. said, if the division was to take place of what remains, he for one was willing for the new States' to come in, and, regardless of what they have received, let them have their equal share. For these reasons, he hoped neither the resolution nor the amendment would be agreed to. He had heard no gentleman in the debate intimate that the division should take place until the public debt be paid. Then, and not until then, will be the proper time to talk about the division, for, until the debt should be paid, we in fact had no surplus funds. The question was then put, Will the House agree to The President had manifested a desire to pay off the debt, that member or portion of the said resolution which is and redeem the credit of the country; and he sincerely contained in the following words: "and internal improvehoped that Congress would adopt no measure in relation ment?" and decided as follows: yeas, 92--nays, 94. to the pecuniary affairs of the country, that would thwart The question was then put, Will the House agree to his views. The people of the country were responding that member or portion of said resolution which is conto the views of the Chief Magistrate, and it afforded abun-tained in the following words: "in proportion to the redant proof that their sentiments were that the country presentation of each in the House of Representatives, should be out of debt. This country [said Mr. S.] (a ma- with leave to report by bill or otherwise?" and decided as jority) is composed of economical men, and they look upon follows: yeas, 117--nays, 75. it in the same light as they would with regard to individuals. They know it is the interest of the nation as well as individuals, to be out of debt. When, sir, the time shall have arrived (and he hoped it would speedily come)| The resolution agreed to by the House is as follows: that the public debt shall be discharged, and he should "Resolved, That a select committee be appointed to have a voice in the councils of the nation, if the policy of inquire into the expediency of appropriating the nett prethe country require it, and the people should wish it, let ceeds of the sales of the public lands among the several a division of the surplus revenue take place. But, for States and Territories for the purpose of education, in one, he doubted the policy. It was the honest conviction of his mind, and ever had been, that this Government has authority to carry on works of internal improvement in a national point of view in the States, but that they should be the sole judges of the propriety of the work, and direct all appropriations for objects of that kind.

So this part of the resolution was agreed to.

So the first, second, and fourth members of the said resolution were agreed to by the House, and the third member thereof was rejected.

proportion to the representation of each in the House of Representatives; with leave to report by bill or otherwise."

THE JUDICIARY.

Mr. BUCHANAN moved that the House now go into Committee of the Whole, with the view of resuming the consideration of the Judiciary bill; but waived his motion

Mr. WICKLIFFE moved that the resolution be committed to a Committee of the Whole House on the state of at the request of the Union.

And pending the question on this motion,

Mr. SPENCER, of New York, who desired to introduce in the House an amendment to the bill, that it might be INGER-ordered to be printed. The House gave leave for the reception of the amendment, which was ordered to be printed; and then

The previous question was called for by Mr.
SOLL, and was demanded by a majority of the members

present.

The said previous question was then put, and decided by yeas and nays, as follows: yeas, 127--nays, 59. So the House decided that the main question be now

put.

The main question was then stated, that the House do agree to the resolution as herein before recited; when

Mr. HAMMONS called for a division of the question on the said resolution, the division to take place between the words "Territories" and the word "for."

The SPEAKER decided that the resolution was susceptible of this division.

From this decision of the Speaker, Mr. BARRINGER appealed to the House; and, after some brief debate on the question-'Is the decision of the Speaker correct? It passed in the affirmative.

The question was then put, Will the House agree to the

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, Mr. CAMBRELENG in the chair, and took up the Judiciary bill; the question being on the amendment thereto offered some days ago by Mr. STRONG, of New York.

Mr. STRONG rose, and proceeded to address the committee in support of his amendment. He had spoken about an hour, when the usual time of adjournment having arrived, he gave way for a motion to that effect.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 1830. CONDITION OF THE INDIANS. The following resolution submitted to the House on the 13th instant by Mr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, and laid upon the table for one day, was taken up.

JAN. 20, 1830.]

Condition of the Indians.

[H. of R.

"Resolved, That the Secretary of War be directed to stance, the Secretary of War should, in reply to that relay before the House a statement of the number, with the solution, inform the House that lands had been wrested moral and political condition of any Indians located within from the Indians by violence, or obtained by duplicity, the jurisdictional limits of the States of Maine, Massachu- would not such a fact have an important bearing upon the setts, Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island, and Pennsyl- discussion of a subject of such magnitude and importance, vania, respectively: such statement to be accompanied by as the one then under discussion? The State of Georgia as critical a showing as can be furnished by the department, had been complained of on account of alleged cruelties to of the forms of government to which they have been here- the Indians within her jurisdiction; and he wished to know tofore and are now subjected, with the names of the re- whether any gentleman on that floor would say that Georspective tribes, which tribe or tribes (if any) have been, gia should be subject to a rule to which others would not or are now, permitted to exercise the right of self-govern- and ought not to submit. He might suppose a casc, for ment, independent of the State or States in which they are example, of Indians having been sold for debt, and such located; and (if any) which tribe or tribes is, or are now, a fact might be developed by the answer to this resolution. or have been subjected, in any degree, by the Govern- Was the gentleman from New York [Mr. Sтonns] apprement of the State or States in which they are located, to hensive of the information which it might be the means of the municipal jurisdiction of such State or States; and the eliciting? It was his [Mr. T.'s] sole wish to obtain such extent to which they may have been, or are now, so sub-information as would lead them to some practical conclujected." sion upon the subject, in order that they might be enabled Mr. STORRS, of New YORK, offered the following to render even-handed justice. Although the gentleman amendment: from New York might be right in the position he had assumed, yet Mr. T. said that he could not be wrong in the view he had taken of the subject. If it should be the, fact that Indian lands had not been improperly obtained, Mr. STORRS said, that the bearing of the resolution of such would be apparent; and, on the contrary, if such the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. THOMPSON] was too were found to be the case, it would be made equally eviplain to be misunderstood. The House could not fail to dent by the response of the Secretary to that resolution. see, without any particular explanation, to what subject Mr. HOFFMAN, of New York, hoped the amendment the information called for was expected to apply, and in would not be adopted. He would not hear the remarks what way it might possibly be used. It was therefore of his colleague, and knew not the ground of his motion, quite proper that the resolution should be so amended, as but supposed the rule of law applied to those Indians who to bring from the War Department that kind of informa- reside on lands the title of which had been extinguished, tion, if any exists there, which may have some real appli- as well as to those on lands whose title was not extinguishcation to any subject with which it may be hereafter sup- ed. He, for one, believed that the sovereignty of the posed to have any connexion. There are many Indians States over the Indians was not affected by either condition, [said Mr. S.] residing among the white population, culti- and he hoped the resolution might be adopted in its fullest vating their farms like others, distinct from any of their extent, and complete information be obtained relative to original tribes, and virtually incorporated into the body the moral and political condition of the Indians in all the politic of the State of New York, and there were some States.

Insert after the word "Indians," as follows: "residing on lands which they claim to hold or possess, under their native or original title; and."

tribes, too, in the State, who held their lands directly under Mr. BELL, of Tennessee, expressed himself opposed the grant and authority of the State; there were others to the resolution, as not, in his opinion, conducive to any which had voluntarily surrendered their lands, and now valuable end. Many of the inquiries contained in it were held their possessions under compacts with the State. He of a merely speculative nature, on which difference of thought it would be found, too, that the present relation of opinion might naturally exist between persons actuated some of them to the State had been amicably settled long by the same motives, and looking forward to the same before the revolutionary war. He supposed that no one object. The sources whence those opinions emanated could desire to consult the Secretary of the War Depart- were accessible to all; and why then should the Secretary ment as to the political condition of any Indians of those of War be called upon to express an opinion which every classes. The House was quite as competent as that officer member could best form for himself? Besides, the introto form a correct opinion of their civil condition and their duction of this resolution went to precipitate a discussion political relation to the State. If the War Department upon a subject which it was confessed by all was of the can furnish or procure for us any information as to those first importance, and upon which it was necessary, consiIndians who hold their lands under their native title, I shall dering its extreme delicacy, and the consequences which certainly [said Mr. S.] throw no obstacle in the way of his researches. But I shall still think that we already have in our power quite as full and authentic historical materials as the War Department can find or furnish, to guide us to a safe conclusion on that subject. He hoped, therefore, that the gentleman from Georgia would think with him, that the adoption of the amendment would bring to the House a kind of information (if it should bring any at all) which would bear somewhat more directly on any question likely to come before the House, than the original resolution could furnish.

might result from the decision upon it, that every member of the House should be prepared to enter into by a previous investigation of its merits. It would be brought forward, he would take it upon himself to say, before the House as speedily as possible by the Committee on Indian Affairs, at which period it could be with more propriety discussed. He, therefore, moved that the resolution be laid upon the table.

Mr. FOSTER called for the yeas and nays on the motion to lay the resolution on the table, but they were not granted by the House.

Mr. WAYNE preferred, should it meet the object of the gentleman from Tennessee that the resolution should be postponed to a day certain, instead of being laid on the table.

Mr. THOMPSON said that the gentleman from New York appeared to have widely mistaken the object of his [Mr. T.'s] resolution. He had seemed to suppose that it referred to New York alone; whereas, it not only specifically included several other States within its scope, but Mr. BELL said, he should be happy to accommodate was manifestly intended to comprehend the whole ques- the gentleman from Georgia, but it would not meet his tion. Not [he observed] to refer simply to particular com- object so well, as his wish was to put an end at once to munities in New York, but to ascertain what had been the what he deemed a premature and useless discussion. exercise of the rights of sovereignty within the various The question was then put on laying the resolution on States, in reference to that important matter. If, for in- the table, and carried-101 to 62.

H. of R.]

THE JUDICIARY.

The Judiciary.

The House then again went into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, Mr. CAMBRELENG in the chair, and took up the bill to alter and extend the Judiciary system.

Mr. STRONG rose, and concluded his argument in support of his amendment.

[The remarks of Mr. STRONG were to the following effect:]

[JAN. 20, 1830.

any more judges, and without trying any new experiment, it is difficult to conceive any good reason why it should not be done.

Should the opinion prevail, that separate, independent circuit courts ought not to be adopted, it will seem to follow that we must take the plan proposed by the bill, with the certainty that the number of the justices of the Supreme Court will be increased beyond what convenience and efficiency require in performing their original and appellate duties; and with the further certainty that the desired equality will not be attained, or that we must take the plan proposed by the amendment, with the certainty that it will be simple, cheap, uniform, and efficient in its operation, and with the further certainty that it will produce exact equality in the order and administration of justice throughout the Union.

Mr. STRONG said, that, on most occasions, he was content to give a silent vote; but, on the present subject, so important in its character and consequences, and holding the opinions he did in regard to it, he hoped a departure from his accustomed rule would not be deemed improper. The amendment which I have submitted, [said Mr. S.] The alleged incompetency of some of the district court the committee will recollect, proposes to transfer all the judges is no argument against the plan. Were the fact powers and duties of the circuit courts to the several so, the fault would not be in the system. But there is no district courts of the United States, and to require the evidence of the fact. And the fair inference is, that they justices of the Supreme Court, being thus relieved from are able men, competent judges, and worthy of the high their circuit duties, to hold annually two or more terms of stations they occupy. And why should they not be? Their that court. To avoid embarrassment in discussing the jurisdiction embraces more matters, and covers a larger principle upon which the plan depends, I have purposely field of property and of human life, than that of the ciromitted some necessary provisions. These, however, cuit courts.

should the plan be adopted, may be readily supplied, The honorable chairman, [Mr. BUCHANAN] after having either here, or by sending the subject back to the Com-described, in fresh colors, the deprivations and wants of mittee on the Judiciary. This amendment opens the Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louwhole field of debate. It does more. Contrasted with isiana, contended that the circuit court system ought to the bill, it presents plainly the two great alternatives, be extended to those new States, in order that they might either to go on increasing the number of the justices of be put upon an equal footing with the older States of the the Supreme Court, for the performance solely of mere Union. I have admitted that the benefits of the federal incidental and subordinate duties, or to require, in another judiciary ought to be distributed equally among the form, and of others, the performance of those duties. It twenty-four States. But, sir, does the bill do this? It seems clear to me that the federal judiciary must be or- clearly does not. It makes no provision for having one ganized upon the one or the other of these cardinal principles.

I suppose it will not be denied that the benefits of the federal judiciary ought to be extended equally to all the States, and to all the people. Any plan which falls short of this will be partial and unjust, because it will give to some, and deny to others, privileges which are common to all, and which all have an equal right to possess.

Nor do I think it will be denied, as a general rule, that the number of judges should be fixed with a sole view to the performance of those duties which cannot be performed by others, and the court so organized as to secure independence, soundness, and efficiency in its members. Any deviation from this rule ought to be sustained by clear and conclusive reasons.

of the justices of the Supreme Court hold a circuit court

in the northern districts of New York and of Alabama, or in the western districts of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Louisiana. These are left with district courts only; and this is certainly the more remarkable, as two of these districts are in the States for whose benefit and relief we are urged to pass the present bill. Without stopping, therewhich the honorable gentleman proposes, it is apparent, fore, to inquire into the practical operation of the plan on the face of it, that it does not do equal justice.

But we are again earnestly entreated by the honorable gentleman [Mr. B.] to pass this bill, because the decisions of the district courts, in the districts to which the circuit court system has not been extended, are, in certain cases, final and conclusive upon the property and life of the citi The existing inequality in the distribution and character zen. If there be any thing hard or unmerciful in this, of the federal courts among the several States, may be the remedy is easy, and should be applied without delay. remedied, either by adding to the number of justices on We should at once give an appeal in those cases, directly the bench of the Supreme Court, or by separating them to the Supreme Court of the United States. This from their circuit court duties. Now, sir, if the remedy would obviate the evil, and is one answer to the argument. be by addition, the first idea that forces itself upon the The bill, however, is exceedingly objectionable for another mind is, that we must add to the number until we get up reason; it is partial and unequal. It withholds the cirto twenty-four, thus making the number of the justices of cuit court system from five large districts, and thus leaves the Supreme Court equal to the whole number of States the property and lives of the citizens in these districts at in the Union. Any less number will approach towards the mercy of district court judges-thereby entailing upequality, but can hardly attain it. But if the remedy be on a large portion of our fellow-citizens the very evils by separation, perfect equality may be produced by the which the gentleman so eloquently deprecated. No such institution of independent circuit courts and judges, or objection exists against the plan I have proposed. It reby adopting the plan which I have proposed; that is, by moves all these evils; it presents an equal and uniform transferring the jurisdiction, powers, and duties of the system; it carries this equality and uniformity into every circuit courts to the existing district courts. part of the Union.

As several of the Western States do not enjoy the bene- If I did not misapprehend the honorable gentleman, he fit of circuit courts, which are common to the others, I shall seemed to take it for granted that the bill involved no new take it for granted, without inquiring into the wants or principle, that it merely extended the present circuit court desires of these new States, that this inequality ought to system, which he told us had been sanctioned by long ex be remedied; because, when each State, in this respect, perience. Sir, plans may appear the same on paper, and can be put upon a footing of perfect equality with every yet widely differ in principle and practical results. Had other, without any additional expense, without appointing he proposed to increase the number of the justices of the

JAN. 20, 1830.]

The Judiciary.

Supreme Court to one hundred, instead of nine, and to create a new circuit for each, would not the committee have instantly perceived that the plan, though the same to the eye, was founded upon a new principle, and for the attainment of purposes different from those which the framers of the present circuit court system designed? It appears to me that the bill contains a new principle. I may be wrong. And should the committee think I am wrong, still I hope they will bear with me, while I state some of the reasons which have led me to the conclusion, that, by passing the bill, we shall not only depart from the old, but shall adopt a new system, highly dangerous in its character and consequences.

[II. of R.

security remains for the independence, or soundness, or safety of the Supreme Court.

But, in order to weaken the force of these objections, the honorable gentleman insisted, with much apparent zeal, that there ought to be a judicial representation upon the bench of the Supreme Court! A representative court! And for what purpose? Is it to be of State courts, of State rights, or of State laws? Then ought not each State to have her own separate representative on the bench? Sir, to me this doctine is alarming. I have hitherto heard it suggested; but this is the first time I remember to have heard it seriously urged. Is it not fallacious, and full of mischief? What is it? Is it not this-that a judge, havThe duties of the justices of the Supreme Court are of ing acquired at a circuit court all the knowledge he can two distinct kinds. One kind consists of those duties which of the local law, first decides what the law of the particugrow out of the original and appellate jurisdiction of the lar State is, and then represents his own decision to his court, and which they must, and they only can, perform. brethren on the bench as the law of the State? Will any These, therefore, are their principal duties. The other great good be likely to result from this sort of judicial rekind consists of those duties which Congress has, from presentation? I think not. But I ask the committee, time to time, imposed upon them, by requiring them to whether, in a court organized upon these principles, there hold circuit courts. These duties are performed by them, may not necessarily be another sort of representation? not as justices of the Supreme Court, but as judges, of Will not such a court too often and too faithfully reprean anomalous character. These duties can and may be sent the prejudices, and passions, and partisan spirit of performed by others. They are, in fact, now performed the day? by some one or other of the district court judges. It seems, therefore, too plain to be controverted, that these duties are merely and wholly incidental and subordinate to their principal duties.

I agree with the honorable chairman, that we ought not to resort to independent circuit courts and judges, if a better plan can be devised. Still, I think the circuit court system less objectionable than the plan proposed by the Now, sir, the honorable gentleman having relieved me bill; and the plan I have submitted less objectionable than from the trouble of proving that the justices of the Su- either, because it is simple, cheaper, more efficient, and preme Court are sufficiently numerous, by distinctly ad-more uniform. But I cannot agree with him, that the premitting that seven, the present number, are enough, and judices of the people against the old system of 1801 still that nine would be too many for the convenient and eth-exist. Sir, I know nothing of the men, or the motives, cient performance of their original and appellate duties, or the measures of that day, except from history. I am does it not follow that this new court, of nine, is to be no advocate of that system; it will not do for the present created for the purpose avowedly of performing those day; it lived but a year, and I will not open its grave, nor duties which, we have seen, are merely and wholly inci- disturb its ashes. By recurring, however, to the history dental and subordinate, and which may be performed of that stormy period, the committee, I think, will find by others? The present court is admitted to be large that that sy stem was abolished, not because it proved to enough for the business of the bench. Wherefore in- be intrinsically or practically wrong, but because the peocrease the number of the justices? If you do increase ple thought such a number of judges unnecessary and the number, do you not depart from the old, and adopt a burdensome. So in the present case. Is not the honornew system, resting upon a new principle? What is this able gentleman in danger of falling into the same difficulbut changing the principle into the incident-thereby ty? Is not his plan obnoxious to the same objections? Are making the secondary duties of the old court the main object nine justices of the Supreme Court necessary? They are and excuse for creating the new court? Ought we not to not for the security of the constitutions, or laws, or liberpause before we adopt a plan which, while it fails to pro- ty of the country. As their numbers are increased, their duce the desired equality among the States, may prove fa- individual responsibility will be less felt, and their high tal to the soundness and efficiency of the court itself? And powers will be exercised with less and less consideration if we increase the number beyond what is wanted on the and care. Nor are nine necessary for the prompt and disbench, where shall we stop? what is the limit? The hon-creet administration of justice. But all the purposes of orable chairman admitted that soon another must be added justice will be readily and equally attained by adopting to the number; but contended that ten would answer the the plan which the amendment proposes. Should expeexigencies of the country for some hundred years to come. rience prove that intermediate courts are convenient and Sir, if we add two now, for the purpose of doing circuit desirable, they may be easily formed of the district court duties, and for that purpose only, what shall we say when, judges, without at all disturbing the harmony or uniforat short intervals of time, two more, and two more, and mity of the system. There are now twenty-seven district so on, (until the court comes to consist of twenty or thirty justices,) are demanded at our hands for the like purpose? Shall we say that the duties of the bench require no addition? But if this objection be of no avail now, when we have not passed the safe boundary, of what avail will it be then, when we have passed that boundary? Again, sir, the number of circuits must always depend more upon the extent of territory to be traversed, than upon the quan tity of business to be done. Look over the vast territories of the United States! When these come to be divided and admitted into the Union, must they not be provided Against the separation of the justices of the Supreme for? What assurance have we that the States, if we sanc-Court from the circuit courts, the honorable chairman tion the principle of this bill, will not successively claim strongly objected, because, in that event, the justices the right of having a justice of the Supreme Court? might become idle, rusty, and corrupt. These are not the Think you that such claims would or could be rejected? terms he used; but if I did not mistake the design of his If, then, we pass this bill, and incur these dangers, what remarks, these were, in his judgment, the probable conse

judges, and thirty-two or three districts. Courts may be organized, composed of three of these judges. Take New York and New Jersey, for example. They are divided into three districts, and have three judges. It is so also with Pennsylvania and Delaware. In this way, nine courts may be organized, with appellate jurisdiction, or with the jurisdiction which the present circuit courts possess, with the merit of embracing all the States, and of producing entire equality among all, without the appointment of a single new judge.