New Orleans daily crescent., 1866-11-13
rns saltinlore PolIee Troubie.


The action Of Judge Bond-a notorious radical
in committing to prison the new polite commits
sioners and the sheriff Of Baltimore, is the most
scandaouS prostitution OF 8 jualciS. office to par
tisan ends that has occurred in ou times The old
commissioners have been feIl0r ed byan authority
competent To remove them. Their successors have
been legally appointed and duly sworn in. When
they are preparing TO take possession OF the Office
ana ~ enter on their duties, they are snapped up
and hauled before ranoprous partisan Judge who
requires them to give bail noGinally to keep the
peace, but Teelly to forego the Office to which they
have been appointed. Refusing to ahdicate, they
are sent to d dungeon.
Judge Bond, knows, as every sound lawyers
knows, that the men he had locked up in prison
are the legal commissioners police and thatthe
vo2d ones, since their removal, are law-defging
usnrpers. Neither he nor anybody has any eX-
pectation that the new commissioners can be Kept
in for any length of time, what the radicals are
aimng al is to put off the transfer until after Tues
day the d8Y Of the election. Their hope is to use
the deposed commissioners to do their dirty par
&isan work in experimenting the polls and eX.
Guiding legal voters. And Judge Bond lends him
self as d tool to accomplish this partisan object.
This deraogogie prating about the courts can
impose On nobody Of ordinary intelligence and
adiscernment. tits quite true tnat large classes OF
scaRtF 9EeFsies are decided by the courts But
there are other controversies including those
relating to the succession Of public officers, in
some Of which the courts have no jurisdiction at
ALL ana in others very restricted one. The case
Of the Baltimore police commissioners is case
Id (which the courts have no jurisdiction at all.
There il no radical so bigotted-~if he possesses
ordinary quickness Of iatellect-that we could not
convince him, by fiEe minutes conversation, that
controversies of this kind do NOT go into the
courts Take the case of the Southern senators
and representatives who are excluded from Con-
gTess, Can they appeal to the courts Their
right ta seats is legally clear. Why, then, may
tleE net apply to tie Supreme Court for 8 matt
dal9Ms 10 coIapel the Senate and the House to
admit taeRi For this simple reason, that the
Senate II for ITSELF ani the House for itself, the
exclusive nudge OF las elections aud qualifications
oil iis own members. The question Of member
ahipais eontbiped question ef TACT and Of law,
anu atle house IN ~ hiel membership Il claimed is
ahe saie tr4hllal far tryiUgit, ndeciding on such
claims. the tWo houses Act jndichtlly, and being in
respect to al such cases a court Of lastresoft, no
appeal caa be taken to any other tribunal.
Ann1her illustrative Instance Of the same kind
is aif0rded by the expulsion Of a member, We
sfippbse no radical would contend that when MI.
Bright was expelled from the Senate, for alleged
eotnpltnity with the rebellion he could have held
on II bis sent after thegate of expulsion, and kept
possession till some court hal reviewed the actor
Of fhe Senate, and decided that the expuison wa
regular. II the courts had such jurisdiction
they, aud not the Senate would have the power *
expe I'll that ease the Senate would be only al
aceuser and the courts would determine whethe
the accusation vas well founded. An idea SO 40
aiird never seriously occurred TO anybody. Bn
1t il no more absurd than the appeal to tn
counts in the case Of the deposed police commits
gi6aais
Tho trial of fimpeachments BY the Senate afford
another Illustration which viii enable the radical
fOsgets correct idea of such cases from their owl
pof1t Of view HI the House should impeacl
PreSdent johnson, next winter, and the senat
should try, condemn and depose him, what woul
tile aaieals say il he should refuse to gige up hi
Office till he had taken an appeal 70 the Suprem
Court? They would say, and very correctly, tho
it was a matter with which the Supreme Court ha
nothing To do. For the trial OF impeachment:
the Senate itself il a court, and being q court Q
exclusive jurisdiction it is court of last resort
Its determinations III such cases are subject TO n
review There is broad distinction between th
action of Congress ia its slegislatiye capacity an
the action 81 its separate Houses in judicial cf
paciiy Every law of Congress may be passe
nponby the eonfts, and set aside il adjudged NJ
constitutional. But when either House acts as
court as il does IN admitting or eXpeliing men
begs. ana as the Senate does in trying impeacl
gnenfs so appeal lies in the ordinary tribunal
Fer,f such an appeal could be taken, the d.
cision Of ali such cases would rest with the cour