The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-12-21

Mexico, he VIII return IN the SuS1UetGRnu, and
make report to the Government Tor the future
action Of Congress.
The Late Decision of the Supreme Court
on Military Trials During the War.
From tie HerutG.
In the Supreme Court of the United States on
Monday last, upon an appeal in the case of Milli-
gan, Bowlcs, and Hersey (sOns of liberty, tried
in Indiana as reasonable conspiralors by mill
tary commission during the war, it was decided
that said military commission had no constitu-
tional authority to try and punish q citizen of
Indiana, not in the military Or naval service, TOR
an ofense committed i'll the State of Indiana,
where the ordinary courts Of justice we're open
and undiSturbed in the exercise II their func-
tious. This decision an official repor. of waich
we await from the Court, covers all those cases
OF the arrest, trial, and punishment by the Fede-
raj military authorities in the loyal States during
the Rebellion, and will probably give rise to
numerous prosecutions for damages by indi-
viduals who have suffered from such military
arrests and punishments
This decision is the law from the final judicial
tribunal OF the country and II must be so re-
Cognized. But a Copperhead journal, in its
rejoicings over this result, tnro vs. out hint or
two winch may possibly bring up in Congress
before long the question OF the reconstruction
OF the Supreme Court itself. Tue hints thrown
out are these: That the Court, after tins
righteous decision, may set aside the legislation
OF Congress II il shall assume to act on the
hypothesis that ratification of the pending
constitutional amendment by threefourths of
the represented States is sufficient 10 make it
part OF the Constitution; that ''it Congress
undertakes TO degrade STATES into Territories its
measures will be stranded on the same barrier
and that "t Congress undertakes 10 resist the
judgments of the SuOreme Court, toe Com
mander IN Chief of the Army president john
sony will have some duties to perform IN such
a cOnjunCture"
This is a hint of possible conflict between
| King and Parliament. We app,ehend nOthIng
| of the kind. But let US suppose that u majority
of the Supreme Court are men established In the
! old Democratic theory Of the Constitution,
| which eliminated in the Dred Scott decision
| surely there is reason for Congress to look well
to this Court before 1t proceeCs another step in
! Southern reconstruction. supreme Court
! judPes are but men, and on political questions
are apt, like other men, 10 shape their opinions
of the law 10 their fixed political notions. IT,
! therefore, we still have a majority in the Su-
! preme Court of the old Democrauc school of
| Judge Taney, we have no security Tor the future
that even the Constitutional amendment abol-
ishing slavery will stand; tor if the doctrine Is
| not sound that three-lourt OF the represented
| States are competent TO make the amendment
| part OF the supreme law 1t is void from the fact
| that number Of the southern states required
| TO make up threctourths OF all the States were
reduced TO the ratification in an irregular way,
and by Federal Compulslon on the part of Presl-
dent Johnson in his exercise OF the discretion
OF q cOLquerOr
The decision in the Indiana case may be ac-
cordlng TO the strict letter OF the Constitution;
but i'll adhering TO this strict letter we must go
back to President BuChanan'S decsiOn--that be
could find no authority IN the Constitution to
interfere with a seeding State. We must 90
back to the Dred Scott decision, and fall in with
the Chicago plattorm-that the war tor the
Union was a failure. and illegal and void. We
hold however, that the war. that last appeal OF
kings and peoples has resulted IN great revo-
luton, superseding the Constitution as il was,
and demanding from the results of the war and
from the sovereign voice OF the people victorious
in the war a new Interpretation and new de-
parture even by the Supreme Court 1t is in
this view, from the Indiana decision, ignoring
the vital necessities OF the Government during
2 the Rebellion, that reconstruction OF the
= Supreme Court adapted 10 the paramount decl-
siOns of the war looms up into bold Ielel as a
) question OF vital importance. In respasSmg
7 upon the issues decided bY the war the Court
may be faithful 10 the letter OF the Constitution
, as II was; but it is assuming jurisdiction over
the superior tribunal o. the ysar. which vas an
appeal from the Constitution to the sword,
But still the Constitution, as II its trainers
, had toreseen this difficulty, provides the remedy.
There shall be one Supreme Court, and such
: other inferior courts as Congress may from
7 time to time Ordain and establish. The Constl.
tuition establishes the Supreme Court, and pro-
Vides that its judges shall be appointed by the
President, by and with the advice and consent
of the Senate, and shall hold their offices dur
= ing good behavior; but the number of these
| Judges is left TO the discretion OF Congress-
> Thus, by increasing or diminishing the number
OF the Judges the Court may be reconstructed
, in conformity with the supreme decisions Of
the war. In any event. it may be inferred that
! | a court largely composed of judges handed
down from Polk, Pierce, and Buchanan, and
? having little or nothing to do with the war
! and still living in the atmosphere of the Drec
Scott decision, Is not adapted to meet the ISSUES
= decided by the war, nor the demands OF the
; great revolution under which the sovereigE
people of the United States regard that DreC
: disgrace. AS the Court now stands, away
behind the war, we hold that there is gooC
reason TO fear that its judgments yet to CONT
: in regard to the dougs of Congress during anC
e since the war; including the abolition of slavery
! and the creation OF our present national debt
u if not provided Tor in season, may result in
70 new chapter of troubles and disasters to tn
county.