Indeed I may with truth add, that the proceedings, taken collectively,
appeared to me to present a sufficient intimation of the main question,
to serve as a ground of decision.
However, take the case under either aspect; as excluding the
consideration of the main question by an omission in the pleadings and
record; or as exhibiting it fully to the cognizance of the court.
It never was pretended that a writ of error ought to have been granted,
unless the matter was apparent on the record. Whose office was it to
make it thus apparent. Of the attorney who managed the pleadings. If,
therefore, he has failed to do so, we may presume that he considered the
ground untenable, or was guilty of inattention. Either presumption
would be fatal to a citizen of the United States; and the condition of a
foreigner cannot create a new measure in the administration of justice.
It is moreover certain, that those who have been consulted on Pagan's
behalf, as well as others, have seriously doubted whether a cause,
which has been pursued to the extent which his had reached before the
commencement of our new government, was susceptible of federal relief.
The last observation opens the inquiry, what remedy ought the Supreme
Court of the United States to have administered, even if the question
had been fairly before them? My opinion is, that the very merits are
against Mr.
Pages:
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386