FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   751   752   753   754   755   756   757   758   759   760   761   762  
763   764   765   766   767   768   769   770   771   772   773   774   775   776   777   778   779   780   781   782   783   784   785   786   787   >>   >|  
evision by his writ of error; and also that the defendant waived this defense by pleading over, and thereby admitted the jurisdiction of the court. But in making this objection, we think the peculiar and limited jurisdiction of courts of the United States has not been adverted to. This peculiar and limited jurisdiction, has made it necessary, in these courts, to adopt different rules and principles of pleading, so far as jurisdiction is concerned, from those which regulate courts of common law in England, and in the different States of the Union which have adopted the common-law rules. In these last-mentioned courts, where their character and rank are analagous to that of a Circuit Court of the United States; in other words, where they are what the law terms courts of general jurisdiction; they are presumed to have jurisdiction, unless the contrary appears. No averment in the pleadings of the plaintiff is necessary, in order to give jurisdiction. If the defendant objects to it, he must plead it specially, and unless the fact on which he relies is found to be true by a jury, or admitted to be true by the plaintiff, the jurisdiction can not be disputed in an appellate court. Now, it is not necessary to inquire whether in courts of that description a party who pleads over in bar, when a plea to the jurisdiction has been ruled against him, does or does not waive his plea; nor whether upon a judgment in his favor on the pleas in bar, and a writ of error brought by the plaintiff, the question upon the plea in abatement would be open for revision in the appellate court. Cases that may have been decided in such courts, or rules that may have been laid down by common-law pleaders, can have no influence in the decision in this court. Because, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, the rules which govern the pleadings in its courts, in questions of jurisdiction, stand on different principles and are regulated by different laws. This difference arises, as we have said, from the peculiar character of the Government of the United States. For although it is sovereign and supreme in its appropriate sphere of action, yet it does not possess all the powers which usually belong to the sovereignty of a nation. Certain specified powers, enumerated in the Constitution, have been conferred upon it; and neither the legislative, executive, nor judicial departments of the Government can lawfully exercise any authority beyo
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   738   739   740   741   742   743   744   745   746   747   748   749   750   751   752   753   754   755   756   757   758   759   760   761   762  
763   764   765   766   767   768   769   770   771   772   773   774   775   776   777   778   779   780   781   782   783   784   785   786   787   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

jurisdiction

 

courts

 
States
 

United

 

plaintiff

 

common

 

peculiar

 
limited
 

powers

 

Government


admitted

 

character

 

defendant

 

appellate

 
principles
 

Constitution

 

pleadings

 

pleading

 

pleaders

 

question


Because

 

decision

 
influence
 
decided
 
revision
 

abatement

 
brought
 

judgment

 
enumerated
 
conferred

Certain
 

sovereignty

 
nation
 
legislative
 

executive

 

authority

 
exercise
 
lawfully
 

judicial

 
departments

belong

 

arises

 

difference

 

regulated

 

questions

 

sovereign

 
possess
 

action

 
sphere
 

supreme