this logical dilemma: "So general has been the im-
pression that the Courts possess this great power, now
denied, that several honorable members of this House
have censured the Judges for not declaring that the
Sedition Act was imconstitutional. K they had power
to do so respecting that Act, why deny them the power
as to other Acts ? '* Gouvemeur Morris also pointed out
that the Court had already, in the case of the invaUd
pensioners and in the carriage tax case, passed on the
vaUdity of Acts of Congress; and he showed that
Congress itself had, in the former case, expressly sub-
mitted the question of validity to the Court. "There
was a time when the American Legislature submitted
their Acts to judicial decision. At that time, Washing-
ton presided. Will it be said that the Administration
was then too humble?'* After a long debate, the
Resolution was lost by a vote of five to thirteen. In
the House, a similar Resolution that " provision ought
to be made by law for submitting to judicial decision*'
the rights of the Judges had been lost, by a vote of
thirty-five to fifty-seven, after a debate on January 27,
1803. "The memorial of the Circuit Judges has been
dismissed without much ceremony by those who, in
feeling power, appear to forget there are such princi-
ples as right and wrong, said a leading FederaUst
newspaper.^ »
This refusal of Congress to take any action towards judicial determination of the rights of the Circuit Judges seemed to render it certain that through private litigation the question would be presented for the final determination of the Court. But as the case of Marhury
^Columbian Ceniinel, Feb. 16, 1803. The Amm4xm Daily AdperHser (Phil.)» Feb. 18, 1803, quoted a long editorial from the New York Evening Poet in whic^ it was said : President Jefferson and the majorities in the House of Congress dare not submit the claim of the Circuit Judges for their compensation to judicial examination and decasion*"
