The members of the Federal Judiciary are appointed for life, and they can be dismissed from office only by impeachment. In England no judge can be removed but by conviction for some offence, or the address of both Houses of Parliament, which may be called an Act of Legislature. But the judges of the Supreme Courts cannot be reached by address, and enjoy perfect immunity from the measures of either the President or the Houses of Congress. In some of the states, however, a similar provision to that of our constitution has been adopted, but the dangers to the practical independence of the judges, arising from popular excitement, have been neutralized by requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of each branch of the legislature, in order to effect a removal.

In some of the states the judges are periodically elective: this I think must be considered as a vicious system, and many persons of experience will be found in the United States who much condemn it, and who regret that the organization is not universally

by no means be lost sight of in any political relations with the American Government. Its sovereign power is incomplete. From which it results, that in many cases, where the law of nations is concerned, it is impossible for the American Government to admit reciprocity, without exceeding its legal powers.—Politica's Aperçu de la Situation interieure des Etats Unis d'Amerique, p. 79.

assimilated to that of the judiciary of the Federal Government.

There is one peculiarity of the state "judiciary" deserving of remark. Two associate judges are appointed, who assist a legal judge presiding on the bench of the courts of the various judicial districts: this has appeared to many foreigners as an injudicious anomaly in legal practice. I am not sufficiently cognizant of the subject to attempt to decide upon its technical propriety; but, practically, the results of this system are good. The associates being generally men of respectability and good sense, well acquainted with the local peculiarities of their districts, and engaged in the ordinary transactions of life, they may often modify the mere legal and strictly literal application of the laws. The presiding lawyerjudge, abstracted by professional pursuits from a similar familiarity with the common business and occupations of his fellow-citizens, has thus an opportunity of obtaining information on particular cases from two persons who may be regarded in some measure as responsible jurors; they may also be considered as answering many of the purposes of our magistrates, of whom by far the greater proportion are not legal men, and often very imperfectly qualified to decide on legal points; they are liable to greater responsibility however than our magistracy, and although sometimes acting de facto as equitable

arbitrators, leave points of law to the professional judge. An appeal also lies from their decisions to the Supreme Court.

Captain Hall does not think that the independence of judicial functions in the United States is sufficiently assured. His remarks on this subject are so ably answered by the author of a "Review of Captain B. Hall's Travels in North America*," that I must refer the reader to an extract from it, to be found in the Appendix†, for a much better elucidation of the subject than it is in my power to give.

It is to be regretted that Captain Hall should have so decidedly announced a determination never himself to adopt the old principle of audi alteram partem (on the subject of America), which he justly recommends to others; he might possibly have found that in some instances he has, from the unavoidable disadvantages under which all foreigners labour when describing in detail so extensive a country as the United States, misconceived some points in a moral and political system so very different from our own.

Mr. Vigne, whose opinions on this subject deserve

* Attributed, I believe rightly, to the President of the Bank of the United States, Mr. Biddle, a gentleman distinguished alike for sound sense, extensive information, and the pleasing urbanity of his manners.

+ Vide Appendix, No. 1.

greater weight from his being himself a lawyer, as well as from the generally unprejudiced tone of his . pleasing work, says, "The authorities of the supreme court are intended as the safeguards of the union;" and he adds, justly, "that the independence of this court, and, in fact, of all the federal judiciary, may be termed the sheet anchor of the United States."

The late decision of the court in favour of the Cherokee Indians, and reversing a decree lately obtained by the state of Georgia, cannot but add to the dignified and impartial character that has ever distinguished the proceedings of that eminent body, and gives additional confidence, if any were wanting, in the future firmness of a court, whose principles are as unbiassed by selfish as by party feelings.

CHAPTER VI.

Misrepresentations of the domestic manners of the Americans.Many of the peculiarities of the social system of the United States not attributable exclusively to the Republican form of government.-Advantages and defects compared of American and English systems.

IT was not my intention to have touched upon the social system of the United States, or the effects produced upon it by the nature of its government, it is but incidentally connected with the object of these remarks. A late work, however, upon the "Domestic Manners of the Americans," has presented such a very unfaithful picture of society in the United States, that a few observations on the subject may be necessary. It is true that the

authoress describes but the manners and habits of a portion of the community, and of a section of the country but lately emerged from the state of an almost uninhabited wilderness; while her candid declaration of dislike and ill-will towards the Americans and their institutions, political or social, sufficiently accounts for the satirical, clever, but highly coloured caricatures in which the writer indulges. But the general reader, amused by the spirited tone of