of Decisions. Sessions of the court which were formerly held in a room on the ground floor of the Capitol of the United States in Washington, are now held in the dignified chamber occupied by the Senate of the United States before the erection of the present Senate wing of the Capitol. In the original constitution of the court, the Justices of the Supreme Court were to act as presiding justices of the circuit courts, which were arranged by the original judiciary act to include the various district courts of the country, in accordance with their geographical positions. The practice of Justices of the Supreme Court going on the circuits, however, has been almost obsolete for years on account of the pressure of the business of the court, but each Justice is still assigned to a circuit as the titular head of the courts of that division of the judiciary, and may, when there is no judge of the circuit court available, issue certain orders as presiding justice of the circuit. Unless, however, necessity exists because of the absence of the circuit judge or of the district judge qualified to act in the case, such an order could not be signed in Washington, but the Justice would have to proceed to the circuit. It may also occur that an important case might need the presence of the Supreme Court Justice assigned to the circuit, at a sitting of the circuit court, or circuit court of appeals, and in general the business relative to the supervision of the judicial affairs of the United States circuit courts comes respectively under the Justices in accordance with their circuit assignments. The statutes require that each Justice of the Supreme Court shall hold at least one term of court in the Circuit to which he is assigned in each two years. On account of the pressure of other business these sittings are necessarily brief.

As has been previously suggested, in addition to the questions arising under the practice of the modified common law in the Supreme Court of the United States, the additional questions arise in Federal courts as to the jurisdiction of such courts under the Constitution. Problems relating to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court are especially difficult, and have not only been considered frequently and at length in previous decisions of the court itself,

but are being presented daily for consideration and decision. The Constitution provides that in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a State shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction; that is to say, that any case involving or affecting the classes of litigants named may be brought directly into the Supreme Court. The principle of the inferior and the superior courts is a familiar one, namely, that causes of lesser importance shall be determined in the lower and more numerous courts, leaving the higher courts, which are fewer in number, free to devote their time to other than what may be called the routine matters of jurisprudence. The necessary oversight and direction of the procedure of the lower courts by the higher is exercised through the right of appeal, and litigants, dissatisfied with the decree of the lower court, may take the case to a higher court for review and reconsideration. The Supreme Court of the United States being the court of last resort in the Federal branch of American jurisprudence, it is evident that only cases of the highest importance should be brought into the Supreme Court as original or initiatory proceedings. Under the power given to Congress to establish and ordain inferior courts, the former has, for the purpose of discouraging, so far as possible, criginal suits in the Supreme Court, limited its exclusive jurisdiction, that is, that shared with no other court, to three classes of cases, namely, those in which two States are the parties, or the United States and a State and those brought against ambassadors or menbers of their household. In each of these cases the principle of sovereignty is involved in that the States, as being in themselves independent sovereigns, and ministers as representatives of sovereigns, ought not to be brought before an inferior court to that of the highest, and ought not to be subjected to any delay in the settlement of a controversy, unless in case of the ambassador, such controversy should be initiated by the foreign diplomatic representative himself. When, however, in a controversy in which a State is a party, the opposing party is not another State or the United States, while the case may be brought in the Supreme Court, it may also be brought in the inferior court, and when an ambassador

or other public minister in a foreign country brings an action, or a consul or vice-consul is a party in any case, the action may be brought either in the Supreme Court or in the inferior court, as may be deemed advisable. The situation, then, as to cases which may be begun in the Supreme Court, is that controversies between sovereign States and against ambassadors and members of their households must be brought in the Supreme Court. Controversies in which a State is a party with citizens on the other side, may be brought either in the Supreme Court or in a lower court, and the same is true of a suit brought by an ambassador or minister or in which a consul or vice-consul is a party.

It is evident that the foregoing classes of cases, even if advantage were taken of the option to appear in the Supreme Court in every case of possible original jurisdiction, would not account for the great number of cases now before the Supreme Court of the United States. As a matter of fact, the original docket, or list of cases in which the court takes original jurisdiction, is comparatively insignificant. The greater part of the work of the court comes from the classes of cases in which the court is given appellate jurisdiction, and questions so arising present the many and novel propositions which make the Supreme Court of the United States a living entity and a perpetual fountain of law and jurisprudence. Appeals to the Supreme Court may be taken in certain cases from the district courts, in certain other cases from the circuit courts, and in another class of cases by appeal to the Supreme Court itself for certain writs, the issuance of which is provided for by the statutes in cases which come within the Constitutional jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Thus while the Supreme Court cannot issue all of the prerogative writs as can a court proceeding under the common law, unlimited by Constitution, it can issue writs of prohibition to district courts when such courts are proceeding as courts of admiralty and with maritime jurisdiction, that is to say, it can direct a district court not to do certain things relating to the operation of vessels. By like provisions of law the Supreme Court can issue writs of mandamus to any courts under the authority of the United States or to

any persons holding office under the United States, commanding them to do certain things when a State or a foreign representative is a party in the case in which the mandamus is framed; otherwise the issuance of writs out of the Supreme Court consists in the issuance of writs of certiorari in certain cases, and of injunction in cases in which the Supreme Court would have jurisdiction if brought as proceedings in that court. Appeals or writs of error, however, may be taken to the Supreme Court in a considerable number of classes of cases from the district and circuit courts. If, in any case, the jurisdiction of the district court is in question, an appeal or writ of error may be taken direct to the Supreme Court instead of through the circuit court and circuit court of appeal. In this case, however, the facts and merits of the controversy, except so far as they affect the jurisdiction of the court, are not to be considered by the Supreme Court, which would take cognizance of the question of jurisdiction alone. Similar actions in appeal from final decisions in prize cases in the district court, or in cases of conviction of a capital crime, can be taken. In any case brought in the district court which involves the construction or application of the Constitution of the United States, or any case in which the constitutionality of any law or the validity and construction of any treaty is drawn into question, or any case in which the constitution or law of a State is claimed to be in contravention of the Constitution of the United States, an appeal or writ of error may be taken directly to the Supreme Court, without the necessity of going through the lower appellate court. This latter provision is made in order that there shall be as little delay as possible in determining on the questions of constitutional law, such law including within its scope all of the matters suggested in the foregoing ground for direct appeal.

It is contemplated that all the classes of cases not belonging to the foregoing and which constitute the bulk of the litigation in the Federal courts, shall proceed from the lower courts to the circuit court of appeals and to be as far as possible finally determined upon without the necessity of action by the Supreme Court. In case, however, any controversy duly be

fore the circuit court judges presents questions of law concerning which the court desires the instruction of the Supreme Court, it may be certified by the judges of the circuit court upon the law points and the Supreme Court may either decide upon the point raised, in which case the instructions given are binding upon the judges of the circuit court, or the Supreme Court may direct that the whole record shall be sent up for its consideration and review, in which case the controversy would be heard and adjudicated as though it had been brought to the court for review by a writ of error or an appeal Moreover, it is made competent for and in some cases the duty of the Supreme Court to issue a writ of certiorari or certification to the circuit court in order that a case which, but for this action on the part of the Supreme Court, would be finally decided in the circuit court or court of appeals may be brought up for consideration and adjudication by the Supreme Court. This action would be especially taken in the case of a decision by the lower courts which would have a tendency to confuse or complicate the administration of the law by a decision differing from those previously given on the same point of law. In certain classes of cases stated in the chapter on "The Judiciary," the decisions of the lower courts are made final, but in others than these cases, a right is established by statute to an appeal, writ of error or review. The United States may also appeal in cases in the Court of Claims where the judgments are adverse to the United States, and claimants in the Court of Claims may appeal to the Supreme Court where the amount in controversy is in excess of $3,000, or where an order of forfeiture of the claim to the United States has been made by reason of alleged fraud in the claim. By recent legislation, the United States has also been given the right of appeal in criminal cases from the district or circuit courts when the invalidity or construction of a statute is in question, or when there has been a decision or judgment sustaining a plea in bar, so that the defendant has not been put in jeopardy.

A further and much discussed right is that of the removal of cases from State courts to the courts of the United States and to