The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1866-10-31
THE ISSUE.

ScCretaEys
The following letter from Mr.. Brown
ing, Secretary of the Interior, addressed
to some of his former constituents, ap-
pears in the Washington Intelligencer.
1t has been submitted to the President,
and he has fully approved it, and de-
sired it to be made public, with the un-
derstanding that it fully represented his
dresent position:
WASHINGTON, Oct. 13, 1866.
To Col. ". II. Beaneson and Major III. b.
Sulliran, Quincy, H.:
1t would give me great
pleasure to comply with your request
and visit Illinois to meet my old friends
and neighbors, and talk to them face to
face upon the great questions now be-
fore the country. But it is not practi-
cable for me to do so. My public duties
] forbid it.
Our governments is worth preserving.
No people were ever blessed with one
better worth it. But it is not certain
that we will save it. There are now
two tendencies in public affairs, both of
which are fraught with danger. One is
to centralized power in the general
government; the other an ABSORPTION by
the legislative department of many of
the powers and prerogatives of the e1-
ecutive and the Judiciary. The safety of
a free government is in keeping the
power near the people. This was well
understood by the statesmen who formed
the original thirteen States, and united
them and their people in one federal
government. They gave to the federal
government only such powers as were
necessary for the welfare of the whole
United States, reserving all other
mowers to the States respectively, and
their people, and in framing State con-
stitutions and laws they placed as much
power as was compatible with the gene
raj welfare of the State in the govern
ment of counties, townships and lesser
municipalities.
To guard still further against abuse,
or too great concentration of power,
they distributed the functions of Gov
ernment, State and Federal, in separate
bodies of magistracy. The natural ten
dency of power is to strengthen its
hands and enlarge its sphere of action,
and if the Federal Government absorb
great powers heretofore reserved to the
States, or if one department usurps i'm
portant functions of the others, the
structure of our complex system will he
radically changed, and our free Govern,
ment will descend into despotism.
THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT.
The legislative is much the strongest
of the departments, and the most aS-
gressive, because, its members are re-
sponsible to no power but the will of
the dominant party for acts of usurpa-
ton. 1t is the only department from
the encroachmsnts of which any serious
danger to our institutions is to be ap--
pretended. 1t has heretofore exercised
more influence than is compatible with
safety and entire freedom over both the
executive and judiciary. 1t has some
times impressed pernicious influence
upon judicial action, and where it has
failed to accomplish that in advance of
judgments has subsequently Over-ruled
and annulled them. And without ut all
impugning the motives of legislators, /
may venture to say that if the present
Congress were not restrained by posi-
tive and emphat c provisions of the
Constitution they would greatly
abridge, if they did not altogether an
nihilate the power of appointment to
and removal from Office now cOnhded to
the executive, and the salutary restraint
which he holds over legislation through
the veto power. This is danger al
WAYS present when the executive and
legislative departments are in antagon-
| - = in nf
party excitement to manifest itself, no
matter what party may be in power.
Safety is to be found only in holding
each department firmly and closely
within its orbit.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
If the proposed amendments of the
Constitution be adopted, new and enor-
nous mower will be claimed and exer-
cised by Congress, as warranted by such
amendments. and the whole structure
of our Government will perhaps gradu-
ally but surely be revolutionized. And
SO with the judiciary. If the proposed
amendments he adopted, they may and
certainly will he nsed substantially to
annihilate the State judiciaries. The
first section of the proposed article con-
tains, among others, the following pro-
vision: Nor shall any State deprive
any person of life, liberty or property,
without due process of law" Why in
sert such a provision i'll the Federal
Constitution 1t already contains the
following: "No person shall be de-
prived of life, liberty or property, with
out due process of law" This is iden-
tically the same, except that it is re-
straint upon the powers of the General
Government alone, and has no reference
or application to State governments.
And most of the State constitutions, l
believe all of them, contain a similar
provision as limitation upon the pow
ers of the States respectively.
THE STATES AND THE FEDERAL GOVERN.
MENT.
Now when in the federal constitution
there is this guaranty against arbitrary
and impressive invasions of the rights
of the citizens by federal authority, and
a similar guaranty in the State Consti-
tutions against like oppressive action
by the State governments, why insert
in the federal Constitution new pro-
vision, which has no reference to the
powers of the general government, and
imposes no restraint upon, but is sim
ply repetition of limitation upon the
powers of state governments which Is
already present in the state Constitu-
tioni The object and purpose are man
ifest. 1t is to subordinate the state ju-
diciaries in all things to federal super
vision and control; to totally annihl-
late the independence and sovereignty
of state judiciaries in the administra-
ton of state laws, and the authority
and control of the state over matters
of purely domestic and local concern:
If the state judiciaries are subordinated
all the departments of the state govern
ments will be equally subordinated,
for all state laws, let them relate to
what department of government they
may, OF to what domestic or local inter
est, will be equally open TO criticism.
Interpretation and adjudication by the
federal tribunals, whose judgments and
DEGREES will be supreme, and will
| oyarr;da the decisions of the state courts