Life of Alexander Hamilton

of the several constituent departments of the Government, which, in our system, are the Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary."

The succeeding number takes a commanding survey of the importance of the judicial office, and of the danger of the absorbing character of the legislative power in Governments wholly popular or representative:

"Safety, liberty are inseparably connected with the real and substantial independence of the Courts and Judges. Therefore, being the weakest, the highest motives of constitutional policy forbade that construction which places the existence of the Judges at the mercy of the Legislature."

In confirmation of the principle, that, as a concentration of power is the essence of despotism, the departments among which they shall be distributed should be effectually independent of each other, he adduced the cotemporary interpretations of "the Federalist," as evidence of the views with which the Constitution was framed. These were followed by quotations from Jefferson's notes on Virginia, showing his conviction of the necessity of a barrier between the different departments, and his condemnation of its constitution, which left "the Judiciary and Executive members dependent on the Legislature."

Passing from "this variable and fallible authority," Hamilton gave his own construction of the Constitution, which was:

"That Congress have a right to change or abolish inferior Courts, but not to abolish the actual Judge. The Courts and the Judges being distinct legal entities." "The opposite and conflicting considerations in this case demanded a compromise of this nature. If the inferior Courts were found inconvenient, they could be abolished, the Judges retaining their offices, and thus this construction would enable the community to be relieved from an error in the original constitution of those Courts, and would secure the benefits intended by the Constitution to be derived from the independent tenure of judicial office. It

would also be a great restraint on the factious motives which might induce the abolition of a Court.”

When the bill came from the Senate to the House, a reference to a select committee was requested by the Federalists, but was refused. They then asked delay, but an early day after it had been passed in the Senate was appointed for its discussion. Further delay was requested to give time to learn the state of public opinion on so important a measure. It was refused, and the following day, February the sixteenth, the debate commenced. The leaders in favor of the repeal were, Colonel Smith, Nicholson, Randolph and Giles. Its opponents were, Bayard, Goddard, Griswold of Connecticut, and Stanley of North Carolina.

The speech of Giles was considered as expressing the views of the Chief of the Democratic party. His preliminary observations, which were much extended, purported to give a history of the origin and character of the respective parties in the United States. Having thus quickened the passions of his partisans, he

stitutional question.

passed to the Con

Bayard, in a speech which greatly increased his well established reputation, followed the outline of the history of parties, vindicated that of which he was a member, and exposed in a detail of undenied facts the gross corruption practised by Jefferson to secure his election to the Presidency. He considered next the original Judicial Establishment, indicated its defects, and the remedies which had been provided in the new system, showing the falsity of the statement made by Jefferson as to the business of the Courts. He ended with a discussion of the Constitutional question. "Do not say," he observed in his closing observations, "that you render the Judges dependent only