federalist 80 the power of the judiciary hamilton to the people of the state of new york to judge with accuracy of the proper extent of the federal judicature it will be necessary to consider in the first place what are its proper objects it seems scarcely to admit of controversy that the judiciary authority of the union ought to extend these several descriptions of cases first to all those which arise out of the laws of the united states passed in pursuance of their just and constitutional powers of legislation second to all those which concern the execution of the provision expressly contained in the articles of union third to all those in which the united states are a party fourth to all those which involve the peace of the confederacy whether they relate to the intercourse between the united states and foreign nations or to that between the states themselves fifth to all those which originate on the high seas and are of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction and lastly to all those in which the state tribunals cannot be supposed to be impartial and unbiased the first point depends upon this obvious consideration that there ought always to be a constitutional method of giving efficacy to constitutional provisions what for instance would avail restrictions on the authority of the state legislatures without some constitutional mode of enforcing and observing them the states by the plan of the convention are prohibited from doing a variety of things some of which are incompatible with the interests of the union and others with the principles of good government the imposition of duties on imported articles and the emission of paper money are specimens of each kind no man of sense will believe that such prohibitions would be scrupulously regarded without some effectual power in the government to restrain or correct the infractions of them this power must either be a direct negative on the state laws or an authority in the federal courts to overrule such as might be and manifest contravention to the articles of union there is no third course that i can imagine the latter appears to have been thought by the convention preferable to the former and i presume will be most agreeable to the states as to the second point it is impossible by any argument or comment to make it clearer than it is in itself if there are such things as political axioms the propriety of the judicial power of a government being co-extensive with its legislative may be ranked among the number the mere necessity of uniformity in the interpretation of the national laws decides the question 13 independent courts of final jurisdiction over the same causes arising upon the same laws is a hydra in government from which nothing but contradiction and confusion can proceed still less need be said in regard to the third point controversies between the nation and its members or citizens can only be properly referred to the national tribunals any other plan would be contrary to reason to precedent and to decorum the fourth point rests on this plain proposition that the piece of the whole ought not to be left at the disposal of a part the union will undoubtedly be answerable to foreign powers for the conduct of its members and the responsibility for an injury ought ever to be accompanied with the faculty of preventing it as the denial of perversion of justice by the sentences of courts as well as in any other manner is with reason classed among the just causes of war it will follow that the federal judiciary ought to have cognizance of all causes in which the citizens of other countries are concerned this is not less essential to the preservation of the public faith than to the security of the public tranquility a distinction may perhaps be imagined between cases arising upon treaties and the laws of nations and those which may stand merely on the footing of the municipal law the former kind may be supposed proper for the federal jurisdiction the latter for that of the state but it is at least problematical whether an unjust sentence against a foreigner where the subject of controversy was wholly relative to the lex lozac as well as one which violated the stipulations of a treaty or the general law of nations and a still greater objection to the distinction would result from the immense difficulty if not impossibility of a practical discrimination between the cases of one complexion and those of the other so greater proportion of the cases in which foreigners are parties involve national questions that it is by far most safe and most expedient to refer all those in which they are concerned to the national tribunals the power of determining causes between two states between one state and the citizens of another and between the citizens of different states is perhaps not less essential to the peace of the union than that which has been just examined history gives us a horrid picture of the dissensions and private wars which distracted and desolated germany prior to the institution of the imperial chamber by maximilian towards the close of the 15th century and informs us at the same time of the vast influence of that institution in appeasing the disorders and establishing the tranquility of the empire this was a court invested with authority to decide finally all differences among the members of the germanic body a method of terminating territorial disputes between the states under the authority of the federal head was not unattended to even in the imperfect system by which they have been hitherto held together but there are many other sources besides interfering claims of boundary from which bickerings and animosities may spring up among the members of the union to some of these we have been witnesses in the course of our past experience it will readily be conjectured that i allude to the fraudulent laws which have been passed in too many of the states and though the proposed constitution establishes particular guards against the repetition of those instances which have heretofore made their appearance yet it is warrantable to apprehend that the spirit which produced them will assume new shapes that could not be foreseen nor specifically provided against whatever practices may have a tendency to disturb the harmony between the states are proper objects of federal superintendence and control it may be esteemed the basis of the union that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states and if it be a just principle that every government ought to possess the means of executing its own provisions by its own authority it will follow that in order to the inviolable maintenance of that equality of privileges and immunities to which the citizens of the union will be entitled the national judiciary ought to preside in all cases in which one state or its citizens are opposed to another state or its citizens to secure the full effect of so fundamental of provision against all evasion and subterfuge it is necessary that its construction should be committed to that tribunal which having no local attachments will be likely to be impartial between the different states and their citizens and which owing its official existence to the union will never be likely to feel any bias inauspicious to the principles on which it is founded the fifth point will demand little animat version the most bigoted idolizers of state authority have not thus far shown a disposition to deny the national judiciary the cognizances of maritime causes these so generally depend on the laws of nations and so commonly affect the rights of foreigners that they fall within the considerations which are relative to the public peace the most important part of them are by the present confederation submitted to federal jurisdiction the reasonableness of the agency of the national courts in cases in which the state tribunals cannot be supposed to be impartial speaks for itself no man ought certainly to be a judge in his own cause or in any cause in respect to which he has the least interest or bias this principle has no inconsiderable weight in designating the federal courts as the proper tribunals for the determination of controversies between different states and their citizens and it ought to have the same operation in regard to some cases between citizens of the same state claims to land under grants of different states founded upon adverse pretensions of boundary are of this description the courts of neither the granting states could be expected to be unbiased the laws may have even prejudged the question and tied the courts down to decisions in favor of the grants of the state to which they belonged and even where this had not been done it would be natural that the judges as men should feel a strong predilection to the claims of their own government having thus laid down and discussed the principles which ought to regulate the constitution of the federal judiciary we will proceed to test by these principles the particular powers of which according to the plan of the convention it is to be composed it is to comprehend all cases in law and equity arising under the constitution the laws of the united states and treaties made or which shall be made under their authority to all cases affecting ambassadors other public ministers and consuls to all cases of admiralty in maritime jurisdiction to controversies to which the united states shall be a party to controversies between two or more states between a state and citizen of another state between citizens of different states between citizens of the same state claiming lands and grants of different states and between a state of the citizens thereof and foreign states citizens and subjects this constitutes the entire mass of the judicial authority of the union let us now review it in detail it is then to extend first to all cases in law and equity arising under the constitution and the laws of the united states this corresponds with the first two classes of causes which have been enumerated as proper for the jurisdiction of the united states it has been asked what is meant by cases arising under the constitution in contradiction from those arising under the laws of the united states the difference has been already explained all the restrictions upon the authority of the state legislatures furnish examples of it they are not for instance to emit paper money but the interdiction results from the constitution and will have no connection with any law of the united states should paper money notwithstanding be emitted the controversies concerning it would be cases arising under the constitution and not the united states in the ordinary signification of the terms this may serve as an example of the whole it has also been asked what need of the word equity what equitable causes can grow out of the constitution and laws of the united states there is hardly a subject of litigation between individuals which may not involve those ingredients of fraud accident trust or hardship which would render the matter an object of equitable rather than of legal jurisdiction as the distinction is known and established in several of the states it is the peculiar province for instance of a court of equity to relieve against what are called hard bargains these are contracts in which though there may have been no direct fraud or deceit sufficient to invalidate them in a court of law yet there may be some undue and unconscionable advantage taken of the necessities or misfortunes of one of the parties which a court of equity would not tolerate in such cases where foreigners were concerned on either side it would be impossible for the federal judicators to do justice without an equitable as well as a legal jurisdiction agreements to convey lands claimed under the grants of different states may afford another example of the necessity of an equitable jurisdiction in the federal courts this reasoning may not be so palpable in those states where the formal and technical distinction between law and equity is not maintained as in this state where it is exemplified by every day's practice the judiciary authority of the union is to extend second to treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the united states and to all cases affecting ambassadors other public ministers and consuls these belong to the fourth class of the enumerated cases as they have an evident connection with the preservation of the national peace third to cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction these form altogether the fifth of the enumerated classes of causes proper for the cognizance of the national courts fourth to controversies to which the united states shall be a party these constitute the third of those classes fifth to controversies between two or more states between a state and citizens of another state between citizens of different states these belong to the fourth of those classes and partake in some measure of the nature of the last sixth to cases between the citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states these fall within the last class and are the only instances in which the proposed constitution directly contemplates the cognizance of disputes between the citizens of the same state seventh to cases between a state and the citizens thereof and foreign states citizens or subjects these have been already explained to belong to the fourth of the enumerated classes and have been shown to be in a peculiar manner the proper subjects of the national judicature from this review of the particular powers of the federal judiciary as marked out in the constitution it appears that they are all conformable to the principles which ought to have governed the structure of that department and which were necessary to the perfection of the system if some partial inconveniences should appear to be connected with the incorporation of any of them into the plan it ought to be recollected that the national legislature will have ample authority to make such exceptions and to prescribe such regulations as will be calculated to obviate or remove these inconveniences the possibility of particular mischiefs can never be viewed by a well-informed mind as a solid objection to a general principle which is calculated to avoid general mischiefs and to obtain general advantages publius