the question
under such a seizure whether a forfeiture has been actually incurred
belongs exclusively to the courts of the United States, and it depends
on the final decree whether the seizure is to be deemed rightful or
tortuous; and that not until the seizure be finally judged wrongful and
without probable cause by the courts of the United States can the party
proceed at common law for damages in the State courts.

But by making it "unlawful for any of the constituted authorities,
whether of the United States or of the State, to enforce the laws for
the payment of duties, and declaring that all judicial proceedings which
shall be hereafter had in affirmance of the contracts made with purpose
to secure the duties imposed by the said acts are and shall be held
utterly null and void," she has in effect abrogated the judicial
tribunals within her limits in this respect, has virtually denied the
United States access to the courts established by their own laws, and
declared it unlawful for the judges to discharge those duties which they
are sworn to perform. In lieu of these she has substituted those State
tribunals already adverted to, the judges whereof are not merely
forbidden to allow an appeal or permit a copy of their record, but are
previously sworn to disregard the laws of the Union and enforce those
only of South Carolina, and thus deprived of the function essential to
the judicial character of inquiring into the validity of the law and the
right of the matter, become merely ministerial instruments in aid of the
concerted obstruction of the laws of the Union.

Neither the process nor authority of these tribunals thus constituted
can be respected consistently with the supremacy of the laws or the
rights and security of the citizen. If they be submitted to, the
protection due from the Government to its officers and citizens is
withheld, and there is at once an end not only to the laws, but to the
Union itself.

Against such a force as the sheriff may, and which by the replevin law
of South Carolina it is his duty to exercise, it can not be expected
that a collector can retain his custody with the aid of the inspectors.
In such case, it is true, it would be competent to institute suits in
the United States courts against those engaged in the unlawful
proceeding, or the property might be seized for a violation of the
revenue laws, and, being libeled in the proper courts, an order might be
made for its redelivery, wh