Page:The Supreme Court in United States History vol 1.djvu/231

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
MARSHALL AND JEFFERSON
208


tion took place on the etiquette of sealing and record- ing commissions, and Mr. Lee said the law spoke big words and that the act of recording, under his experi- ence of the Secretary's office, was esteemed done when a copy was delivered for entry, and that the copy re- mained sometimes six weeks unentered, but was still considered as recorded. The Court did not give any opinion, but Mr. Lee proposed to amend his affidavits by a statement that the great seal had been actually affixed to the commissions. The tories talk of drag- ging the President before the Court and impeaching him and a wonderful deal of similar nothingness. But it is easy to perceive that it is all fume which can ex- cite no more than a judicious irritation.*' After one day's consideration, the Court granted this preliminary motion for a rule to show cause and assigned the fourth day of the next Term for the argument of the question whether the petitioners were entitled at law to the is- sue of a writ of mandamus. "The Court engaged in a curious discussion which has terminated in a decision which is considered as a bold stroke against the Execu- tive authority of the Government," wrote a Republi- can Congressman to James Monroe. "It is supposed that no further proceedings will be had ; but that the intention of the gentlemen is to stigmatize the Execu- tive, and give the opposition matter for abuse and vilification. The consequences of invading the Execu- tive in this manner are deemed here a high-handed ex- ertion of Judiciary power. They may think that this will exalt the Judiciary character, but I believe they are mistaken." ^

^ National ItUMiffeneer, Dec. 21, 1801 ; Monroe Papert MSS, letters of Stevens ThomBon Mason, Dec. 21, 1801, and John Breckenridge, Dec. 24, 1801 ; Colum- bian Centind, Nov. 28, Dec. 5, 19, 1801 ; Aurora, Nov. 20, Dec. 80, 1801. "The Tory prints begin to be alarmed about the Judiciary of John Adams' manufacture, and as usual, begin to preach up the regal doctrine of perpetuation in office. We hope shortly to see the whole qrstem altered."