inary understanding, and should, therefore, be construed by
the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought
for in metaphysical subtleties, which may make any thing mean every
thing or nothing, at pleasure. It should be left to the sophisms of
advocates, whose trade it is, to prove that a defendant is a plaintiff,
though dragged into court, torto collo, like Bonaparte's volunteers into
the field in chains, or that a power has been given, because it ought
to have been given, et alia talia. The States supposed, that, by their
tenth amendment, they had secured themselves against constructive
powers. They were not lessoned yet by Cohen's case, nor aware of the
slipperiness of the eels of the law. I ask for no straining of words
against the General Government nor yet against the States. I believe the
States can best govern our home concerns, and the General Government
our foreign ones. I wish, therefore, to see maintained that wholesome
distribution of powers, established by the constitution for the
limitation of both; and never to see all offices transferred to
Washington, where, further withdrawn from the eyes of the people, they
may more secretly be bought and sold, as at market.

But the Chief Justice says, 'there must be an ultimate arbiter
somewhere.' True, there must; but does that prove it is either party?
The ultimate arbiter is the people of the Union, assembled by their
deputies in convention, at the call of Congress, or of two thirds of the
States. Let them decide to which they mean to give an authority claimed
by two of their organs. And it has been the peculiar wisdom and felicity
of our constitution, to have provided this peaceable appeal, where that
of other nations is at once to force.

I rejoice in the example you set of _seriatim_ opinions. I have heard it
often noticed, and always with high approbation. Some of your brethren
will be encouraged to follow it occasionally, and in time, it may be
felt by all as a duty, and the sound practice of the primitive court
be again restored. Why should not every judge be asked his opinion, and
give it from the bench, if only by yea or nay? Besides ascertaining the
fact of his opinion, which the public have a right to know, in order
to judge whether it is impeachable or not, it would show whether the
opinions were unanimous or not, and thus settle more exactly the weight
of their authority.

The close of my second sheet warns me that it is time