ARGUMENT IN THE CASE RHODE-ISLAND AGAINST MASSACHUSETTS. PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
Providence: 1838. Stitched, 60pp, Outer leaves tanned, scattered foxing and light wear, untrimmed. Manuscript at head of title page, "Clerk office CC Pleas County Washington" [tiny holes along several of the manuscript letters]. Good+.
Hazard made his argument in a case "of historic importance. In Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, the [Supreme] Court was called upon for the first time to decide whether it possessed jurisdiction under the Constitution to decide a conflict between two States of the Union, involving a disputed boundary line and the sovereignty over disputed territory" [II Warren, Supreme Court in United States History 42-43]. The Court adopted Hazard's position, which involved a sophisticated exposition of early Constitutional history, holding [over Chief Justice Taney's dissent] that it did have jurisdiction. See 37 U.S. 755 [1838].
Daniel Webster was counsel for Massachusetts. Ironically, Massachusetts presented a State Rights argument, that the Court might lack the power to execute its judgment against Massachusetts. Hazard, seizing a delicious opportunity, responded, "What! Does Massachusetts threaten? Is Massachusetts ready to become a nullifying State, and to set up her own will in defiance of the decrees of this Court and the Constitution itself?"
FIRST EDITION. Cohen 11940.50 [2003 Supp.]. AI 50778 [5]. Not in Marvin, Harv. Law Cat., Eberstadt, Decker. Item #18290
Price: $250.00