00000501 |
Previous | 501 of 534 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
466 CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC PAPERS.
This extension of power is remedial, because it is
to settle controversies. It is therefore to be construed liberally. It is politic, wise, and good that not
only the controversies in which a State is plaintiff, but
also those in which a State is defendant, should be
settled ; both cases, therefore, are within the reason
of the remedy, and ought to be so adjudged, unless
the obvious, plain, and literal sense of the words forbid it. If we attend to the words, we find them to be
express, positive, free from ambiguity, and without
room for such implied expressions : " The judicial
power of the United States shall extend to controversies between a State and citizens of another State."
If the Constitution really meant to extend these
powers only to those controversies in which a State
might be plaintiff, to the exclusion of those in which
citizens had demands against a State, it is inconceivable that it should have attempted to convey that
meaning in words, not only so incompetent, but also
repugnant to it; if it meant to exclude a certain class
of these controversies, why were they not expressly
excepted; on the contrary, not even an intimation of
such intention appears in any part of the Constitution.
It cannot be pretended that where citizens urge and
insist upon demands against a State, which the State
refuses to admit and comply with, that there is no controversy between them. If it is a controversy between
them, then it clearly falls not only within the spirit,
but the very words of the Constitution. What is it
to the cause of justice, and how can it affect the definition of the word controversy, whether the demands
| Title | The correspondence and public papers of John Jay - 3 |
| Creator | Jay, John |
| Publisher | G.P. Putnam's Sons |
| Place of Publication | New York, London |
| Date | [1890-93] |
| Language | eng |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Title | 00000501 |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Transcript | 466 CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC PAPERS. This extension of power is remedial, because it is to settle controversies. It is therefore to be construed liberally. It is politic, wise, and good that not only the controversies in which a State is plaintiff, but also those in which a State is defendant, should be settled ; both cases, therefore, are within the reason of the remedy, and ought to be so adjudged, unless the obvious, plain, and literal sense of the words forbid it. If we attend to the words, we find them to be express, positive, free from ambiguity, and without room for such implied expressions : " The judicial power of the United States shall extend to controversies between a State and citizens of another State." If the Constitution really meant to extend these powers only to those controversies in which a State might be plaintiff, to the exclusion of those in which citizens had demands against a State, it is inconceivable that it should have attempted to convey that meaning in words, not only so incompetent, but also repugnant to it; if it meant to exclude a certain class of these controversies, why were they not expressly excepted; on the contrary, not even an intimation of such intention appears in any part of the Constitution. It cannot be pretended that where citizens urge and insist upon demands against a State, which the State refuses to admit and comply with, that there is no controversy between them. If it is a controversy between them, then it clearly falls not only within the spirit, but the very words of the Constitution. What is it to the cause of justice, and how can it affect the definition of the word controversy, whether the demands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B |
|
| C |
|
| G |
|
| H |
|
| M |
|
| T |
|
| U |
|
| Y |
|
|
|
