John Marshall

Excerpt from book: THE DISTR1C T OF COLUMBIA IS NOT A"STATE " WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTION. Hepburn and Dundas v. Ellzoy. February Term, i805. [2 Cranch's Reports, 445-453.] The proposition of law decided is thus stated by Mr. Justice Curtis in his edition of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States: The District of Columbia is not " a State " within the meaning of that term as used in the Constitution, and its citizens cannot sue in the courts of the United States as citizens of any State. Hepburn and Dundas, who were citizens of the District of Columbia, sued Ellzey, who was a citizen of Virginia, in the United States Circuit Court holden in the District of Virginia, and this question arose: "Are citizens of the District of Columbia citizens of Is the District of Co- a State within the meaning of the sec- lumbia a "State" . . within the meaning of ond section of the third article of the art. 3, Sbc. 2, of the constitution of u.s. Constitution of the United States?" The judges of the Circuit Court being opposed in opinion upon this question, it was brought before the Supreme Court,i the opinion of which was given as follows: i The court was constituted as follows: John Marshall, Chief Justice. William Cushino, William Paterson, ; ) Associate Justices. Samuel Chase, Bushrod Washington, The case was argued by E. J. Lee for the plaintiffs and by Charles Lee for the defendant. Marshall, Chief Justice. The question in this case is whether the plaintiffs, as residents of the District Opinion. of Columbia, can maintain an action in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Virginia. This depends on the act of Congress describing the jurisdiction of that court. That act gives jurisdiction to the Circuit Cou...