the belief) the institution of mandamus proceedings in the Marbury Case as a purely political move on the part of the Federalist Party, and as an effort to scare off their opponents from attempting to repeal the Judiciary Law, is very clearly shown in a letter from a Washington correspondent, written within five days after the repeal bill was introduced,[1] "The debate has attracted considerable attention," he wrote, "but as its importance may not be seen in its true political light, I think it proper to tell you that the late mandamus business in the Supreme Court was calculated expressly with a view to deter from any attempt to repeal this law. The question on the mandamus first appeared as only a contest between the Judiciary and Executive, but it now appears to have embraced a larger scope." After pointing out that, if the Federalist contention that a law establishing a Court was irrepealable was sound, "the Judges, who have so much controul over life and property and who by the boundless construction of common law assume the most dangerous power, would then regulate not only the law but the government", and that Congress must "rescue the country," he continued: "The mandamus, then, would in the first instance act as a check, and in any case tend to throw doubts among weak men and afford at least room for invective; again, if the Court should carry the assumed right of mandamus to Executive officers into practice, the precedent would not only perpetually enable the Supreme Court to controul the Executive but to perplex the Administration by similar litigations on the repeal of the law, in which case the Court would not be at war with the Executive, but with Congress. There is reason to believe that
- ↑ Salem Register, Jan. 88, 1802, letter of Jan. 11, from a Washington correspondent.
