Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, at January Term, 1832, Delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall in the Case of Samuel A. Worcester, Plaintiff in Error, versus the State of Georgia: With a Statement of the Case, Extracted from the Records of the Supreme Court of the United StatesMarshall, John
History
Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, at January Term, 1832, Delivered by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall in the Case of Samuel A. Worcester, Plaintiff in Error, versus the State of Georgia: With a Statement of the Case, Extracted from the Records of the Supreme Court of the United States
Marshall, John
Cherokee Indians -- Missions -- Georgia; Georgia -- Trials, litigation, etc.; Worcester, S. A. (Samuel Austin), 1798-1859 -- Trials, litigation, etc.
That section enumerates the cases in which the final judgment or decree
of a State Court may be revised in the Supreme Court of the United
States. These are, "where is drawn in question the validity of a
treaty, or statute of, or an authority exercised under, the United
States, and the decision is against their validity; or where is drawn
in question the validity of a statute of, or an authority exercised
under, any State, on the ground of their being repugnant to the
constitution, treaties, or laws, of the United States, and the decision
is in favor of such their validity; or where is drawn in question the
construction of any clause of the constitution, or of a treaty, or
statute of, or commission held under, the United States, and the
decision is against the title, right, privilege, or exemption,
specially set up or claimed by either party, under such clause of the
said constitution, treaty, statute, or commission."
The indictment and plea, in this case, draw in question, we think, the
validity of the treaties made by the United States with the Cherokee
Indians: if not so, their construction is certainly drawn in question;
and the decision has been, if not against their validity, "against the
right, privilege, or exemption, specially set up and claimed under
them." They also draw into question the validity of a statute of the
State of Georgia, "on the ground of its being repugnant to the
constitution, treaties, and laws, of the United States, and the
decision is in favor of its validity."
It is, then, we think, too clear for controversy, that the act of
Congress, by which this court is constituted, has given it the power,
and, of course, imposed on it the duty, of exercising jurisdiction in
this case. This duty, however unpleasant, cannot be avoided. Those who
fill the Judicial Department have no discretion in selecting the
subjects to be brought before them. We must examine the defence set up
in this plea. We must inquire and decide whether the act of the
Legislature of Georgia, under which the plaintiff in error has been
prosecuted and condemned, be consistent with, or repugnant to, the
constitution, laws, and treaties, of the United States.
It has been said at the bar, that the acts of the Legislature of
Georgia seize on the whole Cherokee country, parcel it out among the
neighboring counties of the State, extend her code over the whole
country, abolish its institutions and its laws, and annihilate its
political existence.
If this be the general effect of the system, let us inquire into the
effect of the particular statute and section on which the indictment is
founded.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account