Samuel Chase

Samuel Chase – Life, Career, and Legacy

Learn about Samuel Chase (1741-1811), Founding Father, Supreme Court Justice, and the only U.S. Supreme Court justice ever impeached. Explore his early life, role in the Revolution, judicial philosophy, impeachment trial, and enduring impact.

Introduction

Samuel Chase (April 17, 1741 – June 19, 1811) was an influential early American jurist and political figure. He signed the Declaration of Independence as a delegate from Maryland, later became an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and made history when he was impeached (though acquitted) in 1804–1805.

His life intersects with foundational debates over the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, and the proper role of judges in a partisan age. In many ways, his career and impeachment set precedents for how the federal judiciary would be insulated from political pressures.

Below is a deep dive into his life, roles, challenges, and legacy.

Early Life and Education

Samuel Chase was born on April 17, 1741, near Princess Anne in Somerset County, Maryland, in what was then British America. Rev. Thomas Chase (a clergyman of the Church of England) and Matilda Walker.

Chase was educated at home in his youth. When he reached the age of 18, he moved to Annapolis to study law under attorney John Hall, and in 1761 he was admitted to the Maryland bar.

In 1762, he married Anne Baldwin, with whom he had several children (some of whom died in childhood). After Anne’s death in 1776, he later married Hannah Kilty in 1784, and they had additional children.

Political & Revolutionary Activity

Maryland Politics & Early Opposition

Even before the American Revolution, Chase became politically active. In 1764, he was elected to the Maryland General Assembly, where he would serve for about 20 years.

He was a vocal opponent of British policies such as the Stamp Act. He was involved in founding a Maryland chapter of the Sons of Liberty, helped lead boycotts of British goods, and actively resisted tax measures.

In 1774, he was selected to the Annapolis Convention (Maryland’s revolutionary convention) and from 1774 to 1776 served in Maryland’s provincial governance structures.

Continental Congress & Declaration of Independence

Chase was elected to the Continental Congress, and he signed the Declaration of Independence on behalf of Maryland in 1776.

After the war, he remained politically active in Maryland and served in the Maryland Ratifying Convention (for the U.S. Constitution). He initially opposed the Constitution (as an Anti-Federalist), arguing that the new federal government might overshadow state sovereignty.

Though his opposition to the Constitution limited further legislative roles, over time he softened his stance and reentered public service within the judiciary.

Judicial Career

Maryland Courts

After leaving legislative office, Chase turned more toward law and the judiciary. In 1786, he moved to Baltimore, which remained his home thereafter.

He served as a judge on the Baltimore criminal court from 1788 until 1796.

From 1791 to 1796, he concurrently held the position of Chief Judge of the Maryland General Court (a higher state court).

U.S. Supreme Court

On January 26, 1796, President George Washington nominated Chase to serve as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court; the Senate confirmed him the following day.

He took office on February 4, 1796 and remained in that capacity until his death on June 19, 1811.

On the Supreme Court, justices also “rode circuit,” meaning they presided over trials in lower federal courts. Some of the controversies that later led to his impeachment relate to how he conducted those duties.

Chase’s judicial opinions sometimes displayed sharp political and partisan commentary, particularly in high-profile cases under the Sedition Act of 1798.

Impeachment & Trial

Samuel Chase’s impeachment is one of the most historically significant events in U.S. judicial history.

Causes & Accusations

In the wake of the 1800 election, President Thomas Jefferson and his Democratic-Republican allies sought to reduce Federalist influence in the federal judiciary. They viewed Chase as excessively partisan and biased in his judicial conduct.

On March 12, 1804, the House of Representatives voted to impeach Chase, adopting eight articles of impeachment. These charges centered on alleged misconduct in various trials—especially in his handling of the Fries Rebellion case, his supervisory conduct of grand juries, and his manner (including allegedly inflammatory remarks) in Baltimore grand jury charges.

One key ground was that his partisan leanings improperly influenced his judicial decisions or judge behavior. The prosecution framed the impeachment as a matter of ensuring judicial accountability to the people, but critics saw it as a political attack.

Senate Trial & Acquittal

The impeachment trial in the Senate began in 1805, with the necessary two-thirds majority required for conviction.

On March 1, 1805, the Senate voted to acquit Chase on all charges. None of the eight articles achieved the two-thirds threshold needed.

Some Senate senators who otherwise opposed Chase’s philosophies voted to acquit, reasoning that removal based on judicial opinions alone would undermine judicial independence. This act is often viewed as a precedent that judges should not be removed simply for partisan interpretations of law.

Because of that acquittal, Samuel Chase remains the only U.S. Supreme Court Justice to have ever been impeached.

Judicial Philosophy & Character

Samuel Chase was a complex figure—ardent in his convictions, often blunt and partisan in tone, and unafraid to engage in the political currents of his era.

• He was a committed Federalist, skeptical of populist tendencies and protective of property rights and judicial authority.

• He believed vigorously in the role of the judiciary as an independent branch and was critical of legislative overreach, especially when laws threatened liberties or stability.

• Some of his judicial style, especially during trials, was contentious: he occasionally rebuked attorneys, criticized parties, or made sharp remarks—actions that fueled accusations of bias.

• His impeachment defense claimed that judicial decisionmaking involves discretion, and that judges must sometimes restrain advocates or correct improper legal arguments—even if friction arises.

Chase’s career thus embodies tensions in early U.S. governance: how to balance independence with accountability; how to distinguish political views from legal reasoning; and how judges should comport themselves in a poilitically charged republic.

Death & End of Service

Samuel Chase died on June 19, 1811, while still serving on the Supreme Court.

Because he served until death, his judicial legacy remained unbroken by resignation or removal.

Legacy & Significance

Samuel Chase’s legacy is multifaceted and continues to resonate in American legal and constitutional history.

1. Precedent for judicial independence
   His acquittal is widely interpreted as affirming that judges should not be removed simply for their opinions or perceived partisanship—unless there is clear ethical or criminal wrongdoing.

2. Boundary of impeachment power
   The impeachment of Samuel Chase helped define the constitutional limits of congressional removal of judges. It signaled that impeachment should target misbehavior, not mere disagreements about jurisprudence.

3. Influence on early jurisprudence
   On the bench, he participated in early Supreme Court decisions that shaped the meaning of federal statutes, state and federal jurisdiction, and the role of judicial review.

4. Founding-era political figure
   As a signer of the Declaration of Independence and a revolutionary-era activist, he bridged the worlds of politics and law in America’s formative period.

5. Controversial figure
   Historians debate Chase’s temperament and the propriety of some of his judicial conduct. Some see him as too combative or partisan; others view his fervor as consistent with the fierce political disputes of his time.

6. Symbol in constitutional debates
   His impeachment is still cited in debates over court reform, judges’ accountability, and the balance between judicial independence and oversight.

Selected Quotes & Writings

Samuel Chase was not as quotable as some contemporaries, but a few recorded statements reflect his views:

• In resisting legislative encroachment, he once warned that stripping judicial power would “take away all security for property and personal liberty” and reduce the republic to “mobocracy.”

• In impeachment debates, he insisted that removal must be grounded in “evil, corrupt motives” or indictable offenses, not mere disagreement with judicial reasoning. (This principle emerges from his defense during the Senate trial.)

His charges to grand juries and judicial writings are preserved in manuscripts and the Federal Judicial Center’s collections, but many are technical and tied to his judicial duties.

Lessons from Samuel Chase’s Life

From his life and career, several lessons emerge—especially relevant to the challenges of balancing law, politics, and institutional integrity:

1. Independence matters—but so does humility
   Judges must guard against partisan impulses, but also exercise discretion respectfully and cautiously.

2. Accountability must have limits
   If impeachment were used for disagreement with judicial views, the judiciary would become vulnerable to political swings. The Chase impeachment helped expose that danger.

3. Voices of principle often invite conflict
   Chase’s outspoken nature brought him prominence—but also scrutiny and opposition. Great influence often comes with great risk.

4. Institutional norms evolve through crisis
   The fight over Chase’s impeachment shaped norms around how we treat judicial conduct today. Constitutional principles are often solidified in contentious episodes.

5. Public service spans multiple arenas
   Chase’s path—from legislature to revolution to judiciary—shows how early American leaders moved across branches of governance, seeking to shape the republic in many capacities.

Conclusion

Samuel Chase was a towering figure of early America: a fiery patriot, a skilled lawyer, a Supreme Court justice, and the sole justice ever impeached. His career illustrates the tensions inherent in forming a new republic: how to reconcile judicial independence with democratic accountability, how to separate politics from justice, and how institutional values are forged through challenge.

His acquittal stands as a landmark in judicial history. More than two centuries later, the lessons of Samuel Chase continue to inform debates about the role of courts, the limits of impeachment, and the character of judges in a democracy.