er　in　confederations　…　What　tribunals　could　be　introduced　into　the　Union　…　Necessity　of　establishing　federal　courts　of　justice　…　Organization　of　the　national　judiciary　…　The　Supreme　Court　…　In　what　it　differs　from　all　known　tribunals。
  I　have　inquired　into　the　legislative　and　executive　power　of　the　Union；　and　the　judicial　power　now　remains　to　be　examined；　but　in　this　place　I　cannot　conceal　my　fears　from　the　reader。　　Their　judicial　institutions　exercise　a　great　influence　on　the　condition　of　the　Anglo…Americans；　and　they　occupy　a　prominent　place　amongst　what　are　probably　called　political　institutions：　in　this　respect　they　are　peculiarly　deserving　of　our　attention。　　But　I　am　at　a　loss　to　explain　the　political　action　of　the　American　tribunals　without　entering　into　some　technical　details　of　their　constitution　and　their　forms　of　proceeding；　and　I　know　not　how　to　descend　to　these　minutiae　without　wearying　the　curiosity　of　the　reader　by　the　natural　aridity　of　the　subject；　or　without　risking　to　fall　into　obscurity　through　a　desire　to　be　succinct。　I　can　scarcely　hope　to　escape　these　various　evils；　for　if　I　appear　too　lengthy　to　a　man　of　the　world；　a　lawyer　may　on　the　other　hand　complain　of　my　brevity。　　But　these　are　the　natural　disadvantages　of　my　subject；　and　more　especially　of　the　point　which　I　am　about　to　discuss。
  The　great　difficulty　was；　not　to　devise　the　Constitution　to　the　Federal　Government；　but　to　find　out　a　method　of　enforcing　its　laws。　　Governments　have　in　general　but　two　means　of　overcoming　the　opposition　of　the　people　they　govern；　viz。；　the　physical　force　which　is　at　their　own　disposal；　and　the　moral　force　which　they　derive　from　the　decisions　of　the　courts　of　justice。
  A　government　which　should　have　no　other　means　of　exacting　obedience　than　open　war　must　be　very　near　its　ruin；　for　one　of　two　alternatives　would　then　probably　occur：　if　its　authority　was　small　and　its　character　temperate；　it　would　not　resort　to　violence　till　the　last　extremity；　and　it　would　connive　at　a　number　of　partial　acts　of　insubordination；　in　which　case　the　State　would　gradually　fall　into　anarchy；　if　it　was　enterprising　and　powerful；　it　would　perpetually　have　recourse　to　its　physical　strength；　and　would　speedily　degenerate　into　a　military　despotism。　　So　that　its　activity　would　not　be　less　prejudicial　to　the　community　than　its　inaction。
  The　great　end　of　justice　is　to　substitute　the　notion　of　right　for　that　of　violence；　and　to　place　a　legal　barrier　between　the　power　of　the　government　and　the　use　of　physical　force。　　The　authority　which　is　awarded　to　the　intervention　of　a　court　of　justice　by　the　general　opinion　of　mankind　is　so　surprisingly　great　that　it　clings　to　the　mere　formalities　of　justice；　and　gives　a　bodily　influence　to　the　shadow　of　the　law。　　The　moral　force　which　courts　of　justice　possess　renders　the　introduction　of　physical　force　exceedingly　rare；　and　is　very　frequently　substituted　for　it；　but　if　the　latter　proves　to　be　indispensable；　its　power　is　doubled　by　the　association　of　the　idea　of　law。
  A　federal　government　stands　in　greater　need　of　the　support　of　judicial　institutions　than　any　other；　because　it　is　naturally　weak　and　exposed　to　formidable　opposition。　*c　If　it　were　always　obliged　to　resort　to　violence　in　the　first　instance；　it　could　not　fulfil　its　task。　　The　Union；　therefore；　required　a　national　judiciary　to　enforce　the　obedience　of　the　citizens　to　the　laws；　and　to　repeal　the　attacks　which　might　be　directed　against　them。　　The　question　then　remained　as　to　what　tribunals　were　to　exercise　these　privileges；　were　they　to　be　entrusted　to　the　courts　of　justice　which　were　already　organized　in　every　State？　or　was　it　necessary　to　create　federal　courts？　　It　may　easily　be　proved　that　the　Union　could　not　adapt　the　judicial　power　of　the　States　to　its　wants。　　The　separation　of　the　judiciary　from　the　administrative　power　of　the　State　no　doubt　affects　the　security　of　every　citizen　and　the　liberty　of　all。　　But　it　is　no　less　important　to　the　existence　of　the　nation　that　these　several　powers　should　have　the　same　origin；　should　follow　the　same　principles；　and　act　in　the　same　sphere；　in　a　word；　that　they　should　be　correlative　and　homogeneous。　　No　one；　I　presume；　ever　suggested　the　advantage　of　trying　offences　committed　in　France　by　a　foreign　court　of　justice；　in　order　to　secure　the　impartiality　of　the　judges。　　The　Americans　form　one　people　in　relation　to　their　Federal　Government；　but　in　the　bosom　of　this　people　divers　political　bodies　have　been　allowed　to　subsist　which　are　dependent　on　the　national　Government　in　a　few　points；　and　independent　in　all　the　rest；　which　have　all　a　distinct　origin；　maxims　peculiar　to　themselves；　and　special　means　of　carrying　on　their　affairs。　　To　entrust　the　execution　of　the　laws　of　the　Union　to　tribunals　instituted　by　these　political　bodies　would　be　to　allow　foreign　judges　to　preside　over　the　nation。　　Nay；　more；　not　only　is　each　State　foreign　to　the　Union　at　large；　but　it　is　in　perpetual　opposition　to　the　common　interests；　since　whatever　authority　the　Union　loses　turns　to　the　advantage　of　the　States。　　Thus　to　enforce　the　laws　of　the　Union　by　means　of　the　tribunals　of　the　States　would　be　to　allow　not　only　foreign　but　partial　judges　to　preside　over　the　nation。
  ＇Footnote　c：　Federal　laws　are　those　which　most　require　courts　of　justice；　and　those　at　the　same　time　which　have　most　rarely　established　them。　　The　reason　is　that　confederations　have　usually　been　formed　by　independent　States；　which　entertained　no　real　intention　of　obeying　the　central　Government；　and　which　very　readily　ceded　the　right　of　command　to　the　federal　executive；　and　very　prudently　reserved　the　right　of　non…compliance　to　themselves。＇
  But　the　number；　still　more　than　the　mere　character；　of　the　tribunals　of　the　States　rendered　them　unfit　for　the　service　of　the　nation。　　When　the　Federal　Constitution　was　formed　there　were　already　thirteen　courts　of　justice　in　the　United　States　which　decided　causes　without　appeal。　　That　number　is　now　increased　to　twenty…four。　　To　suppose　that　a　State　can　subsist　when　its　fundamental　laws　may　be　subjected　to　four…and…twenty　different　interpretations　at　the　same　time　is　to　advance　a　proposition　alike　contrary　to　reason　and　to　experience。
  The　American　legislators　therefore　agreed　to　create　a　federal　judiciary　power　to　apply　the　laws　of　the　Union；　and　to　determine　certain　questions　affecting　general　interests；　which　were　carefully　determined　beforehand。　　The　entire　judicial　power　of　the　Union　was　centred　in　one　tribunal；　which　was　denominated　the　Supreme　Court　of　the　United　States。　　But；　to　facilitate　the　expedition　of　business；　inferior　courts　were　appended　to　it；　which　were　empowered　to　decide　causes　of　small　importance　without　appeal；　and　with　appeal　causes　of　more　magnitude。　　The　members　of　the　Supreme　Court　are　named　neither　by　the　people　nor　the　legislature；　but　by　the　President　of　the　United　States；　acting　with　the　advice　of　the　Senate。　　In　order　to　render　them　independent　of　the　other　authorities；　their　office　was　made　inalienable；　and　it　was　determined　that　their　salary；　when　once　fixed；　should　not　be　altered　by　the　legislature。　*d　It　was　easy　to　proclaim　the　principle　of　a　Federal　judiciary；　but　difficulties　multiplied　when　the　extent　of　its　jurisdiction　was　to　be　determined。
  ＇Footnote　d：　The　Union　was　divided　into　districts；　in　each　of　which　a　resident　Federal　judge　was　appointed；　and　the　court　in　which　he　presided　was　termed　a　〃District　Court。〃　Each　of　the　judges　of　the　Supreme　Court　annually　visits　a　certain　portion　of　the　Republic；　in　order　to　try　the　most　important　causes　upon　the　spot；　the　court　presided　over　by　this　magistrate　is　styled　a　〃Circuit　Court。〃　Lastly；　all　the　most　serious　cases　of　litigation　are　brought　before　the　Supreme　Court；　which　holds　a　solemn　session　once　a　year；　at　which　all　the　judges　of　the　Circuit　Courts　must　attend。　　The　jury　was　introduced　into　the　Federal　Courts　in　the　same　manner；　and　in　the　same　cases；　as　into　the　courts　of　the　States。
  It　will　be　observed　that　no　analogy　exists　between　the　Supreme　Court　of　the　United　States　and　the　French　Cour　de　Cassation；　since　the　latter　only　hears　appeals　on　questions　of　law。　　The　Supreme　Court　decides　upon　the　evidence　of　the　fact　as　well　as　upon　the　law　of　the　case；　whereas　the　Cour　de　Cassation　does　not　pronounce　a　decision　of　its　own；　but　refers　the　cause　to　the　arbitration　of　another　tribunal。　　See　the　law　of　September　24；　1789；　〃Laws　of　the　United　States；〃　by　Story；　vol。　i。　p。　53。＇
  Means　Of　Determining　The　Jurisdiction　Of　The　Federal　Courts　　Difficulty　of　determining　the　jurisdiction　of　separate　courts　of　justice　in　confederations　…　The　courts　of　the　Union　obtained　the　right　of　fixing　their　own　jurisdiction　…　In　what　respect　this　rule　attacks　the　portion　of　sovereignty　reserved　to　the　several　States　…　　The　sovereignty　of　these　States　restricted　by　the　laws；　and　the　interpretation　of　the　laws　…　Consequently；　the　danger　of　the　several　States　is　more　apparent　than　real。
  As　the　Constitution　of　the　United　States　recognized　two　distinct　powers　in　presence　of　each　other；　represented　in　a　judicial　point　of　view　by　two　distinct　classes　of　courts　of　justice；　the　utmost　care　which　could　be　taken　in　defining　their　separate　jurisdictions　would　have　been　i