jurisprudence, provision is made that it be re-examinable by
the court of last resort. When this question is definitively
adjudged by the tribunal of last resort--the principles on
which it is adjudged being immutable, and the rule of law
adjudged in any one case being equally applicable to every
other case presenting the same facts--the decision is
necessarily conclusive of the law. I do not say how and
after what consideration it maybe considered as definitively
decided. In the first instance it may be misunderstood or
feebly presented. It may have been misapprehended by the
judges, and not considered in all its bearings, or they may
have wanted time and means for a careful and thorough
investigation, and may therefore consent and desire to
reconsider it one or more times. But I only say that, when
thus definitively adjudged, the decision must be deemed
conclusive and stand as a rule of law.

Unfortunately the United States has no "well-ordered system of
jurisprudence." A citizen may be tried, condemned, and put to
death by the erroneous judgment of a single inferior judge, and
no court can grant him relief or a new trial. If a citizen have a
cause involving the title to his farm, if it exceed two thousand
dollars in value, he may bring his cause to the Supreme Court;
but if it involves his liberty or his life, he can not. While we
permit this blemish to exist on our judicial system, it behooves
us to watch carefully the judgments inferior courts may render;
and it is doubly important that we should see to it that twelve
jurors shall concur with the Judge before a citizen shall be
hanged, incarcerated, or otherwise punished.

I concur with the majority of the Committee that Congress can not
grant the precise relief prayed for in the memorial; but I deem
it to be the duty of Congress to declare its disapproval of the
doctrine asserted and the course pursued in the trial of Miss
Anthony; and all the more for the reason that no judicial court
has jurisdiction to review the proceedings therein.

I need not disclaim all purpose to question the motives of the
learned Judge before whom this trial was conducted. The best of
judges may commit the gravest of errors a