only, at first, while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice, as fast as that relaxes.  Independence can be trusted no where but with the people in mass.  They are inherently independent of all but moral law.  My construction of the constitution is very different from that you quote.  It is that each department is truly independent of the others, and has an equal right to decide for itself what is the meaning of the constitution in the cases submitted to its action; and especially, where it is to act ultimately and without appeal.  I will explain myself by examples, which, having occurred while I was in office, are better known to me, and the principles which governed them.

A legislature had passed the sedition-law.  The federal courts had subjected certain individuals to its penalties, of fine and imprisonment.  On coming into office, I released these individuals by the power of pardon committed to executive discretion, which could never be more properly exercised than where citizens were suffering without the authority of law, or, which was equivalent, under a law unauthorized by the constitution, and therefore null.  In the case of Marbury and Madison, the federal judges declared that commissions, signed and sealed by the President, were valid, although not delivered.  I deemed delivery essential to complete a deed, which, as long as it remains in the hands of the party, is as yet no deed, it is in posse only, but not in esse, and I withheld delivery of the commissions.  They cannot issue a mandamus* to the President or legislature, or to any of their officers.  When the British treaty of 180- arrived, without any provision against the impressment of our seamen, I determined not to ratify it.  The Senate thought I should ask their advice.  I thought that would be a mockery of them, when I was predetermined against following it, should they advise its ratification.  The constitution had made their advice necessary to confirm a treaty, but not to reject it.  This has been blamed by some; but I have never doubted its soundness.  In the cases of two persons, antenati, under exactly similar circumstances, the federal court had determined that one of them (Duane) was not a citizen; the House of Representatives nevertheless determined that the other (Smith of South Carolina) was a citizen, and admitted him to his seat in their body.  Duane was a republican, and Smith a federalist, and these decisions were during the federal ascendancy.

     * The constitution controlling the common law in this
     particular.

These are examples of my position, that each of the three departments has equally the right to decide for itself what is its duty under the constitution, without any regard to what the others may have decided for themselves under a similar question.  But you intimate a wish that my opinion should be known on this subject.  No, dear Sir, I withdraw from all contests of opinion, and resign every thing cheerfully