Sidney, wrote for the Enquirer, a series of papers on the law of that case.  I considered these papers maturely as they came out, and confess, that they appeared to me to pulverize every word which had been delivered by Judge Marshall, of the extra-judicial part of his opinion; and all was extra-judicial, except the decision that the act of Congress had not purported to give to the corporation of Washington the authority claimed by their lottery-law, of controlling the laws of the States within the States themselves.  But unable to claim that case, he could not let it go entirely, but went on gratuitously to prove, that notwithstanding the eleventh amendment of the constitution, a State could be brought, as a defendant, to the bar of his court; and again, that Congress might authorize a corporation of its territory to exercise legislation within a State, and paramount to the laws of that State.  I cite the sum and result only of his doctrines, according to the impression made on my mind at the time, and still remaining.  If not strictly accurate in circumstance, it is so in substance.  This doctrine was so completely refuted by Roane, that if he can be answered, I surrender human reason as a vain and useless faculty, given to bewilder, and not to guide us.  And I mention this particular case as one only of several, because it gave occasion to that thorough examination of the constitutional limits between the General and State jurisdictions, which you have asked for.  There were two other writers in the same paper, under the signatures of Fletcher of Saltoun, and Somers, who in a few essays presented some very luminous and striking views of the question.  And there was a particular paper which recapitulated all the cases in which it was thought the federal court had usurped on the State jurisdictions.  These essays will be found in the Enquirers of 1821, from May the 10th to July the 13th.  It is not in my present power to send them to you, but if Ritchie can furnish them, I will procure and forward them.  If they had been read in the other States, as they were here, I think they would have left, there as here, no dissentients from their doctrine.  The subject was taken up by our legislature of 1821-22, and two draughts of remonstrances were prepared and discussed.  As well as I remember, there was no difference of opinion as to the matter of right; but there was as to the expediency of a remonstrance at that time, the general mind of the States being then under extraordinary excitement by the Missouri question; and it was dropped on that consideration.  But this case is not dead; it only sleepeth.  The Indian Chief said, he did not go to war for every petty injury by itself, but put it into his pouch, and when that was full, he then made war.  Thank Heaven, we have provided a more peaceable and rational mode of redress.