could not produce the responsible authors of it.[1] Nevertheless, the story was often repeated, and the "Globe," in 1831, re-printed it in its original form.[2]
The new court held the records during 1825 by military force, and civil war was avoided only by the moderation of the old court.[3]
In November, 1825, Niles quotes a Kentucky paper that more people had left the State than had come to it for many years. It is plain that two classes of persons were driven away by the relief system,—those who were prevented by it from securing such fruits of their industry as they could accumulate, and those who despaired of ever freeing themselves from their embarrassments.
In the mean time the federal Supreme Court had gone on its way making decisions which established the authority of the federal Constitution and the federal judiciary and so integrated the whole national system. Of these decisions, one which was rendered in 1825, Bank of the United States versus Halstead,[4] directly affected Kentucky. It was held that the federal courts could alter the forms of execution which were in use in the States in 1789, so as to subject to execution lands and other property not then subject, and that the law of Kentucky of 1821 did not apply to writs issued from the federal courts.[5]
These decisions were all received with astonishment, contempt and abhorrence, not only by the radical, but also by the moderate State rights men of the time. There was a great deal of declamation in Kentucky in 1825 about rights, liberty, justice, and the sovereignty of the people; but as the "Lexington Reporter" said: What a mockery to talk of justice, freedom, and happiness when the Constitution was brought to the level of such legislative acts as had been adopted by the relief party.[6]
The concurrent effect of the distress in the State, the sad position of the debtors, the political animosity which had been aroused, and the anxiety about great principles of constitutional liberty which had been caused by the judicial decisions which have been referred to, was, to make the political campaign between the old and new court parties in 1825 exceedingly intense. The old court party won a majority in the lower House. The Senate which held over was still of the new court party. A crisis had therefore been reached, but it could not be solved for the time being, because neither party was in a position to win a victory.
The message of Governor Desha[7] of November 7th, 1825,[8] reflects all the elements of excitement and warfare which were in the situation. "The most prominent objects," he says, "which will arrest your attention are the
- ↑ 42 Niles, 315.
- ↑ See page 193.
- ↑ Collins, 105.
- ↑ 10 Wheaton, 51.
- ↑ It was ordered by act of Congress, May 19, 1828, that the forms of writs and proceedings in execution in the federal courts should be the same as when were used in the State courts, in the State in which the proceedings were held.
- ↑ 24 Niles, 391 (1823).
- ↑ This is the gentleman mentioned above, p.52.
- ↑ 29 Niles, 219.
