Page:The Supreme Court in United States History vol 1.djvu/163

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
RUTLEDGE AND ELLSWORTH
137


The excited political situation, however, was such that irrespective of Rutledge's mental condition his rejection by the Senate was certain, and it was accom- plished by a vote of ten to fourteen, as soon as that body convened.^ "This is as it should be," said the Colum- bian Centinel, "and what he ought to have expected, after the impudent and virulent attack he made on their characters. . . • The President, having appointed him ad interim before he knew of his late proceeding, was of necessity obliged to put him in nomination. But since it has been known how passionately he ar- raigned a measure before he had time to consider, or perhaps before he read it, he has been judged (all politicks apart) to be a very imfit person for a Chief Justice of the United States."* "I am pleased that the Senate of the United States discovered so much firmness," wrote William Plmner to Jeremiah Smith. "A man who hastily condemned in a town meeting, in such opprobrious terms, a treaty with a foreign nation, ought not to preside in the highest judicial Court of the Union. . . . The conduct of the Senate will, I hope, teach demagogues that the road to preferment in this enlightened country is not to revile and calumniate government and excite mobs in opposition to their measures." Jefferson, on the other hand, wrote to WiUiam B. Giles: "The rejection of Rutledge by the Senate is a bold thing, for they cannot pretend any objection to him but his disapprobation of the treaty. It is, of course, a declaration that they will receive none

^See New York DaUy Advertiser, Dec. 19, 1795. The BoHon Gaaette, Feb. 82, 1796, publiahed a letter from Philadelphis dated Jan. 9, 1796, sUting that : The Georgia Senators have arrived and are chagrined that the appointment of the Chief Justice had been submitted when their State was unrepresented. The thing looks disrespectful, but may have been accidental."

> Columbian CenHnd, Dec. 26, 1795 ; Plumer Papers M88, letter of Plumer to anith, Jan. 1, 1795; Jiffermm, Vm, Dec. 31, 1796; BoHon Gazette, Feb. 22, 1796, quoting letter from Philadelphia of Jan. 9, 1796.