ploy, and the importance of the subject-matter involved.

I think I have now gone through with all that is needful for me to say to you at this time in regard to the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, its extent, and the manner in which it is exercised. In the next lecture, I shall speak to you concerning the appellate jurisdiction, as regulated by Congress, on writs of error and appeals, and other special modes of procedure.

II.

Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Reference to the State Courts. The Twenty-Fifth Section of the Judiciary Act of 1789. Its subsequent Amendments. - Scope of the Jurisdiction. Final Judgments. - What is a "Suit."-The highest State Court. To what Court the Writ of Error is to go. Grounds of the Appellate Jurisdiction. What the Record must show. Motions to dismiss. How to shape the Record in the

State Court.

How Questions of State Law are dealt with. Practice in the Allowance of Writs of Error. When the Writ is to operate as a Supersedeas. - Doubts of the Constitutional Validity of recent Legislation.

You will remember, gentlemen, that in the last lecture I endeavored to show that the Supreme Court of the United States was constituted by a provision in the Constitution of the United States, not by Congress; that its jurisdiction was divided into two distinct parts, its original and its appellate jurisdiction ; and I further explained, or endeavored to explain, how this original jurisdiction is exercised, as well as what is its extent. In this lecture I desire to speak of the other branch of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, its appellate jurisdiction. You will remember, I explained the distinction between these two classes of cases; the one depending upon the original, and the other upon the appellate jurisdic

tion. The Supreme Court's original jurisdiction allows you to begin a suit there; it has appellate jurisdiction, when you must institute a suit in some other court, and carry it to the Supreme Court by some process provided by law.

The subject of this lecture is the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; and this is divisible into two parts, distinct the one from the other, because the jurisdiction in one class of cases is exercised over courts of the several States; in the other class of cases it is exercised over courts of the United States.

It may seem somewhat surprising, that, although the Constitution of the United States has not in terms granted to the Supreme Court appellate power, in reference to courts of the several States, nevertheless such a power exists; and I may mention to you, in passing, although this is not a lecture upon the Constitution of the United States, nevertheless the matter is incidentally connected with the subject upon which I am speaking, - I may mention, I say, in passing, that at an early day, and especially in the State of Virginia, all appellate power of the Supreme Court of the United States over courts of the several States was not only seriously questioned, but absolutely denied; and it required a repetition of instances, in which the Supreme Court of the United States vindicated its authority over courts of the several States,

within certain well-defined limits, to convince the country that this power existed. It may not be inappropriate for me, in a few words, to call your attention to the source of this power. It is only an implied power, but its implication is necessary, and the reasons for it are satisfactory. Its source will be found in the second clause of the sixth Article of the Constitution: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land."

The question at once arose, how this Constitution, these treaties, and these laws could be the supreme law throughout the United States, unless the judicial power of the United States could take cognizance of all questions arising under them, and give final effect to them. This entire subject in all its bearings you will find discussed, with great ability, in the cases of Martin v. Hunter, 1 Wheaton, 304, and Cohens v. The State of Virginia, 6 Wheaton, 264, in which the Supreme Court, with decisive effect, I say decisive effect, because the country has always since that time acquiesced, vindicated its jurisdiction over the courts of the several States in a limited class of cases.

That jurisdiction was derived from an act of Congress, as indeed all appellate jurisdiction must

be under the Constitution, because it is provided in the Constitution that the Supreme Court shall have certain original jurisdiction (as I explained in the last lecture), and "in all the other cases before. mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions and under such regulations as the Congress may make." "In all the other cases," - that is, in all other cases that have been previously described, not in all cases, but in all other cases previously described, they shall have appellate jurisdiction, "with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the Congress may make.'

Now, immediately after the organization of the government, there was passed, on the 24th day of September, 1789, what has been always since known as the "Judiciary Act," and perhaps the most important section of that act, certainly one that has had very great influence on the country through the judiciary, and which was absolutely essential to carry on the government of the United States as it was established by the Constitution, was the twenty-fifth section. I will read that section, because every part of it requires consideration:

"That a final judgment or decree in any suit, in the highest court of law or equity of a State in which a decision in the suit could be had, where is drawn in question the validity of a treaty or statute of, or an authority exercised under, the