(Tactic
pjo. XLII.]
THE TAiiLE T. No. XLII.
" The good and bad qualities of men are so blend
e.J that it cannot be exaElly known, where one ends
ariithc other begins. This creates a source oj uneafi
rlfi and jealonjy among the people, and makes them
extremely at a loss how to manage the dijlribution of
frttift and-blame."
THERE is no situation in which men can be
placed, where it is more difficult to ascer
tain their real motives of conduct, than when
: hey are speaking of publi<ft affairs. However
diverfified may be the tempers of men, however
oppolite may be their pursuits, they fee.n gene
rally to be agreed in this one point ; that the con
iirr.i of the government might be managed better than
tktj are.
Every man supposes he poflefles a good share
of public spirit. While patriotism is the pre
tence it is a very plausible cover lor ignorance,
ill-nacure and felf-intereft. There are fomany
mifchiefs heflilting from-the deception which is
inpofed on the world, by the falfe colors which
the jraffions and characters of men afluine, that
Icoul3 wish my readers would call their atten
tion to a little felf-examination. Several persons
of my acquaintance often meet in a club to dis
cuss political fubje<fcs ; and whenever I fall in
rheiv company I have observed, they are fond of
(hewing their patriotism by pointing out some of
tie errors of the government, and suggesting
hints of improvement. I (hould be wanting in
candor if I imagined all their observations were
dictated by fiujjler views. Men, who support an
tmblemiffied reputation in the private walks of
life, are entitled to some degree of indulgence,
when we are construing the motives of their con
dudrelacive to public rvanfuctions. Under this
prrfuafion, 1 will mark the outlines of some cha
racters, who I perceive have some influence in
forming and controtiling the popular opinions
and wiihes. The relult will prove that men with
out any bad intentions often mistake the public
good, and excite clamour and uneasiness when no
raufe exists
Ixfeux is a man who, in many refpe-its, pof
fefles real worth and excellence. He is only had
in appearance. Any one, who pafles an hour
■with him, will go away diflatisfied ; but upon a
more intimate acquaintance many good qualities
may bedifcovered. It is to be regretted, that
so worthy a man often makes himfelf and others
unhappy, by the irritability ofhis temper. From
a natural reftlcfluefs of spirit he is so habituated
to murmur and fret, that no character or event
escapes the strokes of his pevifhnefs. When he
is speaking of public men and measures, one
would imagine, he is the invetetate enemy of
both. But there is not any man, whom it would
be more difficult to draw into any deliberate aift
offedition ; and there are few men, from whom
the community derives more substantial benefit.
With an incessant spirit of complaint, he pays
h'.s taxes and performs other duties required of
him, in better season than any of his neighbors,
andwirh as little captioufnefs as he eats his din
ner. This call of temper may rather be called
ill-humour than malice, and keeps a man habi
tually uneafv without provocation or design. It
strikes at 110 determinate cbjetft, but rails indif
criminatelv at the times. Such a man is always
discontented with present objetfls, without giving
any real'on why he is so ; and wifhesalterations,
without being able to tell what they Ihould be.
If I rcmonllrate with my friend Infelix and
Wgehim to check his fretlulnefs, he will scarce
allow that he has a complaining spirit. When
be has been, for several hours, throwing censure
on public affairs, if he is told of it, he recolledts
little or nothing of the matter. He means no
barm and really feels no enmity. Still, however,
bcis a dangerous aflociate. Many ofhis acquaint
ance believe he is a zealous patriot. They do
"ot conlider that he is constitutionally prone to
murmur ; and are apt to ascribe to a cool reflec
tion, those remarks, which involuntarily flow
rom a habit of impatience and difgulf.
I have another friend called Ben k vol us, from
*hom, it would be imagined, the public
ty had nothing to fear. He never speaks with
any degree of fplean and resentment ; and has
uchan habitual serenity of mind as to be the fa
l°rite companion of all his acquaintance. But
range as it may appear, Besevolus some times
a es the confidence of his friends, in the pub
ic proceedings. From a strong desire to fee the
a , a ' rs °f _the community prosper, he beholds
w 't too lively lenfibility every occurrence that
counteracts so benevolent a wi!h. The truth is,
e 1 :u "'' s t0( » favorably of mankind, and is led
0 expect more than events will authorize. As
e lla s no just ideas of human nature, when he
ceu es instances of imperfedaon in any indi-
SATURDA Y, September 1739.
viduals, he is apt to suppose other men are less
liable to frailty. In fliort, he never fufpedts any
errors in any person until he aiflually (lifeovers
them. Benevolus, though a well disposed man,
is a very weak one. His knowledge is not To ex
tenlive as his motives are pure. He has so defec
tive a discernment, that he cannot diftinguifli
between public misfortunes and public errors. His
want oflagacity prevents his tracing di(orders to
their proper source : and makes him charge up
on individuals those evils which result from the
inherent nature of society. He will not complain
with bitterness, but mildly exprefles the pain he
feels that public officers have so little patriotism
and integrity. Bf.nevolus is perfectly honest in
his principles and confines all his afiertions with
in the limits of truth. The defeat of his under
standing exposes liim to mistakes ; and makes
him inadvertently the dupe of men worse than
hiinfelf. This good man, while he fervently
wifiies well, often does ill to the government.
(To be continued.)
NEW-YORK, September 5, 1789.
SKETCH OF PROCEEDINGS OF CONGRESS.
In the HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES of the
UNITED STATES,
SATURDAY, AUGUST 29.
IN committee of the whole—Mr. Boudinot
in the chair.—
DEBATE on the JUDICIAL BlLL—continued.
On motion to strike out the third fe<ftion.
MR. MADISON. It will not be doubted that
some judiciary system is nccoilkry to accomplish
the objects of the government; and that it ought
to be commensurate with the other branches of the
government. Under the late confederation it
could scarcely belaid that there was any real le.
giflative power. There was no executive branch ;
and the judicial was so confined as to be of lit
tle consequence. In the new Constitution, a re
gular system is provided. The legislative power
is made effective for its objeifts ; the executive is
co-extensive with the legi'lative, and it is equal
ly proper that this should be the cafe with the
judiciary. If the latter be concurrent with the
(late jurifdicftions, it does not follow that it will
for that reason be impracticable. It is admitted
that a concurrence exists in some cases between
the legislative authorities of the federal and State
governments ; and it may be fafely affirmed that
there is more both of novelty and difficulty in
that arrangement than there will be in the other.
To make the state courts federal courts is lia
ble to insuperable objevftions. Not to repeat that
the moment that is done, they will from the
highest down to the county courts, hold their
tenures during good behaviour, by virtue of the
Constitution. It may be remarked that in ano
ther point of view it would violate the Constitu
tion, by usurping a prerogative of the Supreme
Executive of the United States. It would bemak
ing appointments which are cxprefsly vested in
that department, not indeed by nomination but
by drfcription, which would amount to the fame
thing. But laying these difficulties aside, a re
view of the constitution of the courts in many
States will fatisfy us that they cannot be trusted
with the execution of the federal laws. In some
of the States, it is true they might, and would be
fafe and proper organs of such a jurisdiCtion :
But in others, they are so dependent on the State
legislatures, that to make the federal laws de
pendent on them, would throw us back into all
the embarralfinents which characterized our for
mer situation. In Connecticut the judges are ap
pointed annually by the legislature, and the le
gislature is itfelf the dernier resort in civil cases.
In Rhode-ifland,which we hope soon to fee united
with the other States, the cafe is at least as bad.
InGeorgia even under there formed Constitution,
the judges are triennially appointed, and in a
manner by no means unexceptionable. In Penn
sylvania they hold their places for seven years
only. Their tenures leave a dependence, par
ticularly for the last year or two of the terms,
which forbid a reliance on judges who feel it.
With refpe(fl to their falaries,there are few States
if anv, in which the judges (land on independ
ent ground. On the whole, Sir, I do not fee
how it can be made compatible with the Consti
tution, or fafe to the federal interests to make
a transfer of the federal j urifdi<ftion to the State
courts, as contended for by the gentlemen who
oppose the clause in question.
Mr. Jackson. —Sir, the importance of the
question induces me to trouble the committee so
far as to answer one of the arguments made use
of in the opposition, and which I think neceflary
(to do away the inipreffions they may have made)
iiiould be anfsvered. The gentleman from Mas-
[. Publijhcd on Wcdnifday and Saturday .'J
fachufetts, (Mr. Sedgwick) has carricd tlie na
tion to the highest pinnacle of glory ..and in a mo
ment hurled it down to its lowest pitch ; and has
laid the loss of national faith, credit, and honor
to the want of an energetic judiciary.—Every
good citizen will with him deplore the abject
ltate we have been brought to ; but, Sir, do his
arguments hold good here ? I am of opinion and
it is evident they do not. —Under our old form of
government Congress had no compelling judicia
ry—no power of reversing the decrees of the State
Judges ; but is it contended that they have or
ought to have none under the present system ?
It is allowed, Sir, that Congress shall have the
power in its fulleft extent to correct, reverse or
affirm any decree of a State court ; and afliired
ly the supreme court will exercise this power.
How then can our national faith or honor be in
jured by striking out the clause ill future ? It malt
be obvious to the gentleman himfelf that his
fears are groundless : For the supreme court will
interfere and keep the State judiciaries within
their bounds. That authority will tell them,
thus far fhallj'e go, and no farther, and will
bring them back when they exceed their bounds
to the principles of their institution.
Another gentleman from Maflacliufetts, (Mr.
Ames) has advanced a position .1 cannot agree
with ; lie has said that the State courts will, nor
cannot take cognizance of laws of the Union/as
it would be taking up matters without the bounds
of their jurisdiCtion, and interfering with what
was not left to them. Sir, I anl'wer that gentle
man with the words of the Constitution, " This
Constitution and the laws of the United States
made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties, Bcc.
shall be the supreme law of the land"—rthis fur
pafles in power any State laws : —The judges
are bound to notice them as the supreme
law, and I call on the gentleman to know, as a
profefiional man, if a criminal was tried for a ca
pital offence under a State law and could juf
tify himfelf under the laws of the Union, if the
State judges could condemn him ? Sir, they
would forfeit their oaths if he was not acquitted;
—this however he has admitted in his argument
in some measure. If there was no jurifdiftion,
neither could they notice the law. I acknow
ledge that the gentleman has used many specious
arguments ; but as they reft chiefly 011 this
ground, I think they are done away.
The gentleman (Mr. Madifjn) from Virginia,
has advanced that by leaving this power in the
hands of the State judiciaries, or by joining their
concurrent authority, you establish them as infe
rior jurisdictions. If the gentlemau will turn to
the I ith and 25th fetftions, he will find both those
pofttions eftabliihed,and what fell from thegentle
man from Mallachufetts concerningjurifdiction is
likewise answered. The State courts by the for
mer are acknowledged to liavecoiicurrent jurisdic
tion in a large extent, where the United States
or an alien are a party, or between citizens of one
State and those of another. And if the jurisdic
tion is acknowledged in some points, it must be
supposed to be so in the fulleft entent. By the
25th, Sir, they are again fully established, and
therefore they are now by the present system in
every light as fully, agreeably to the gentleman's
argument inferior jurisdictions, as they possibly
could be by the principles of the gentleman from
New-Hampshire. And here Sir, I will advert to
the general arguments, used by the gentlemen in
opposition, of the neceflity of power to enforce
the laws of the Union and support the national
exiltence and honor. Sir, lam opposed in some
degree to this clause. For the extent of its
power, even supposing the diftri<ft and circuit
courts abolilhed, swallows up every fbadow of
a State judiciary. Gentlemen have therefore
no reason to complain of the want of federal
judiciary power, for the clause declares, " That
a final judgment or decree in any suit in
the highest court of law, or equity, of a
State in which a decision of the suit could be had,
where is drawn in question the validity of a trea
ty, or statute of, or an authority exercised under
the United States; and the decision isagainft their
validity ;or where is drawn in question the va
lidity of a statute of, or an authority exercised
under any State on the ground of their being
repugnant to the constitution, treaties, or laws
of the United States, and the decision is in fa
vor of such their validity; or where is drawn
in question the conftrucftion of any clause of the
constitution, or of a treaty or statute of, or of a
coinmiflion held under the United Stares, and
the decision is against the title, rio;ht, piivilege
or exemption specially set up, or claimed by ei
ther party under such clause, of the said consti
tution, treaty, statute or commiflion ; may be
re-examined and reversed or affirmed in the su
preme court of the United States.'' Sir, in my