Page images
PDF
EPUB

judges sitting together." The Chief Justice and the Associate Justice of the Supreme Court assigned to each circuit, and the Circuit judges within each circuit, and the several district judges within each circuit, are competent to sit as judges of the Circuit Court of Appeals in their respective circuits. The full court consists of three of the above-named judges, the District Judge sitting in case of absence of judges of higher rank. In case a judge of the Supreme Court is in attendance he acts as presiding judge, otherwise this position is filled by the Circuit Court judges in order of the seniority of their respective commissions.10

SECTION 56. FEDERAL JUDGES.

The Constitution attempts to secure the independence of the United States judiciary, by making their term of office for life, or during good behavior. James Bryce in his "The American Commonwealth," thus comments on this point: "They, (i. e., the judges) hold office during good behavior, i. e., they are removed only by impeachment. They have thus a tenure even more secure than that of English judges, for the latter may be removed by the crown on an address from both Houses of Parliament. Moreover, the English statutes secure the permanence only of the judges of the Supreme Court of judicature, not also of judges of county or other local courts, while the provisions of the American Constitution are held to apply to the inferior as well as the Superior Federal judges."

This protection, however, does not apply to the judges of the territorial courts, who are appointed for a term of years only; these courts not being created

• Rev. Stats., 609, Ex parte Kaine,

10 N. Y., Legal Obs. 257;
Fed. Cas. No. 7598; Pollard vs.
Dwight, 4 Cranch, 421; In re

Circuit Court, 1 Dill, 1; Fed.
Cas. No. 2728.

10 26 U. S. Stats., Sec. 3, Clauses 1

and 2.

under the authority of the third article of the Constitution but under that clause in the fourth article which gives Congress power to "make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory and other public property of the United States."'"1

13

The Judges of the United States courts are not liable in civil suits for their judicial acts.12 Any judge appointed under the authority of the United States, who engages in the practice of law, while holding his judicial office, is guilty of a high misdemeanor. It is no objection to a judge trying a case that before his appointment he was attorney in other matters for one of the parties." Any judge of any Court of the United States who resigns his office after having served as judge for at least ten years, and after having attained the age of seventy years, is entitled, during the remainder of his life, to receive the same salary which was by law payable to him at the time of his resignation.15

SECTION 57. JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL COURTS.

The judicial power of the United States is part of the grant of power from the States to the National Government. Like all other departments of the United States Government, the power of the judiciary is derived entirely from the Constitution. All judicial powers not granted by the Constitution to the Federal courts are reserved to the State courts.16

The grant of judicial power to the United States Government is contained in the second section of the third article of the Constitution, which is as follows: "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in

11 American Insurance Company vs. Canter, 1 Peters, 511. Howard

vs. United States 22 Ct. Cl. 316. Philbrook vs. Newman, 85 Federal Reporter, 139.

13 Rev. Stats., §713.

14 Carr vs. Fife, 156 U. S., 494.
15 Rev. Stats., §714.

18 United States vs. Hudson et al.,
7 Cranch, 32.

law and equity arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party; to controversies between two or more States; between a State and citizens of another State; between citizens of different States; between citizens of the same State claiming lands under grants of different States; and between a State, or the citizens thereof, and foreign States, citizens, or subjects."

The power herein granted is the maximum which may be exercised by the United States; it is not necessary that the United States assume this jurisdiction in full. By the Revised Statutes of the United States1 it is provided that the jurisdiction vested in the courts of the United States, in the following cases and proceedings, shall be exclusive of the courts of the several States:

First. Of all crimes and offenses cognizable under the authority of the United States.

Second. Of all suits for penalties and forfeitures incurred under the laws of the United States.

Third. Of all civil cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it.

Fourth. Of all seizures under the laws of the United States, on land or on waters not within admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.

Fifth. Of all cases arising under the patent right or copyright laws of the United States.

73, §711.

Sixth. Of all matters and proceedings in bankruptcy.

Seventh. Of all controversies of a civil nature, where a State is a party, except between a State and its citizens, or between a State and citizens of other States, or aliens.

The jurisdiction of the inferior United States courts is not directly derived from the constitution but depends on Congressional action in pursuance of the authority granted to Congress by the United States Constitution. Congress, however, cannot grant to the United States courts any judicial power not included within the grants of the Constitution, 18 nor can the legislative or executive branches of the government constitutionally assign to the judiciary any duties except such as are properly judicial in their nature.1o On the other hand, Congress cannot confer any part of the judicial power upon an executive officer,20 nor vest any portion of the judicial power of the United States except in courts ordained and established by itself; " it cannot give jurisdiction to any State court or officer as such.22

21

The power of the United States courts to punish for contempts of their authority, is both incidental to their general power to exercise judicial functions and is expressly recognized and provided for by the laws of Congress.

23

Under the clause granting jurisdiction in all cases

18 Grover and Baker S. M. Co., 18 Wallace, 553.

19 Hayburn's Case, 2 Dallas, 409; In re Sanborn, 148, U. S. 222, 224.

Interstate Commerce Commission vs. Brinson, 154 U. S., 447. 20 Beatty vs. United States, 1 Dev. 231.

United States vs. Ames, 1 Wood

and M. 76; Fed. Cases No. 14,441; The British Prisoners, 1 Wood and M. 66; Fed. Cases No. 12,734, Martin vs. Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheaton, 304; Houston vs. Moore, 5 Wheaton, 1. 32 Prigg vs. Commonwealth, Peters, 539.

16

"Ex parte Terry, 128 U. S., 289; Ex parte Savin, 131 U. S., 267.

arising under the Constitution, Laws, or Treaties, or of the United States, the Federal courts have jurisdiction over both civil and criminal cases." They also have jurisdiction where it appears from the questions raised that some title, right, privilege or immunity on which the recovery depends, will be defeated by one construction of the Constitution or laws of the United States and sustained by the opposite construction.25

The Courts of the United States have no authority to inquire into political matters, but must follow the dicision of the executive department thereon,20 this includes the question whether the Government is justified in disregarding its engagements with another nation," and the decision as to the public character of one claiming to be a foreign minister.28 The recognition of foreign States is a political question, to be decided by the executive department; 20 as is also the question as to the boundaries of a foreign country, or as to its authority over certain territory,30 and the question as to what is the lawful government of a foreign country,31 or one of the States of the Union.32 But the decision as to the boundaries between two States of the Union belongs to the judicial department.33

Cohen vs. Virginia, 6 Wheaton, 264; Tennessee vs. Davis, 100 U. S., 257.

25 Staum vs. New York, 115 U. S.,

248.

Luther vs. Borden, 7 Howard, 1;
Marbury vs. Madison, 1 Cranch,
137, 169; Foster vs. Neilson,
2 Peters, 253, 307; United
States vs. Lee, 106 U. S., 176,
209; Craig vs. Missouri, 4
Peters, 410; Cherokee Nation
vs. Georgia, 5 Peters, 1; United
States vs. Holiday, 3 Wallace,
407, 419; Georgia vs. Stanton,
6 Wallace, 50, 71.

The Chinese Exclusion Case, 130
U. S. 581, 602.

In re Baiz, 135 U. S., 403, 432.

[ocr errors]

29

39 Gelston vs. Hoyt, 3 Wheaton, 246, 324; United States vs. Palmer 3, Wheaton, 610; Williams VS. Suffolk Insurance Co., 13 Peters, 465; Kennett vs. Chambers, 14 Howard, 36, 50.

30 Phippils vs. Payne, 92 U. S., 130, Wheaton's International Law Digest, 22.

31 Jones vs. United States, 137 U. S. 202, 212.

Luther vs. Borden, 7 Howard 1.

33 Rhode Island vs. Massachusetts,

12 Peters, 657, United States vs. Texas, 143 U. S., 641; Virginia vs. West Virginia, 11 Wallace, 39.

« PreviousContinue »