More than one hundred years ago, Chief Justice Marshall, in the great case of Marbury vs. Madison, set forth the view upon which our government has ever since proceeded.

In the last days of his presidency John Adams appointed one William Marbury a justice of the peace for the District of Columbia.

The Senate confirmed the appointment, and the President signed, and John Marshall, as Secretary of State, sealed Marbury's commission; but in the hurry of surrendering office the commission was not delivered, and Jefferson found it in the State Department when he took possession.

Resenting violently these "midnight" appointments, as he called them, Jefferson directed Mr. Madison, his Secretary of State, to withhold the commission; and, at the next December term of the Supreme Court, Marbury moved for a rule to Madison to show cause why he should not be commanded to deliver to the plaintiff the property to which Marbury pretended to be entitled.

Resenting violently these "midnight" appointments, as he called them, Jefferson directed Mr. Madison, his Secretary of State, to withhold the commission; and, at the next December term of the Supreme Court, Marbury moved for a rule to Madison to show cause why he should not be commanded to deliver to the plaintiff the property to which Marbury pretended to be entitled.

Marshall had no intention of commanding Madison to surrender the commission to Marbury.

Accordingly, instead of dismissing Marbury's suit upon any convenient pretext, as, according to legal etiquette, he should have done if he had made up his mind to decide against the plaintiff, and yet thought it inexpedient to explain his view of the law, he began his opinion with a long and extra-judicial homily, first on Marbury's title to ownership in the commission, and then on civil liberty.

Accordingly, instead of dismissing Marbury's suit upon any convenient pretext, as, according to legal etiquette, he should have done if he had made up his mind to decide against the plaintiff, and yet thought it inexpedient to explain his view of the law, he began his opinion with a long and extra-judicial homily, first on Marbury's title to ownership in the commission, and then on civil liberty.

Having affirmed that Marbury's right to his office vested when the President had signed, and the Secretary of State had sealed the instrument, he pointed out that withholding the property thus vested was a violation of civil rights which could be examined in a court of justice.

Marbury v. Madison is not an episode on which any admirer of Marshall can linger with satisfaction.

To accomplish these contradictory results, the Chief Justice began, rather after the manner of Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, by an extra-judicial disquisition.

First came the protest against Marbury and Madison in the impeachment of Chase, because, as Giles explained, if judges were to annul laws, the dominant party must have on the bench judges they could trust.

We have seen that Marshall expressed in the discussions of the Virginia convention a contrary view; but it is one thing to assert an opinion in debate and another thing to declare it from the bench, especially in a case involved in or related to political contests; and such a case was Marbury v. Madison.

Marbury was a citizen of the District of Columbia, who had been appointed as a justice of the peace by John Adams, just before his vacation of the office of President.

It was alleged that Marbury's commission had been made out, sealed, and signed, but that Mr. Madison, who immediately afterwards became Secretary of State, withheld it from him.

Marbury therefore applied to the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus to compel its delivery.

"Charles," said Lady Marney, "you must stand for the old borough, for Marbury.

[Footnote 2: Marbury and Crawford, Digest of the Laws of the State of Georgia, p. 438.]

ii., p. 243; and Marbury and Crawford, Digest of the Laws of the State of Georgia, p. 438.]

[Footnote 1: Marbury and Crawford, Digest of the Laws of the State of Georgia, p. 438.]

[Footnote 3: Marbury and Crawford, Digest of Laws of the State of Georgia, p. 438.]

R80175, 25Jun51, René Maran (A) MARBURY, ELIZABETH.

© 29Dec23, A766617. R76322, 30Mar51, Elizabeth Marbury (A) <pb id='045.png' /> MARDEN, ORISON SWETT.

R80175, 25Jun51, René Maran (A) MARBURY, ELIZABETH.

© 29Dec23, A766617. R76322, 30Mar51, Elizabeth Marbury (A) <pb id='045.png' /> MARDEN, ORISON SWETT.