Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1867-04-25
vn. Mississippi Injunction Case.

tho Mississippi h"JunSuoh s"se'
The efforts to impede and nulllfy the
reconstruction acts passed by Congress,by |
nrinpipg them before the Supreme Court |
Of the United States, forcibly disclose
the resorts which the leaders of the fac
tious in the several Southern States, In
cluded in the provisions OF the law, will |
he led to adopt TO avert or evade its
penalties and thwart the intention Of its
trainers In carrying II out The sudden
termination of the application on the
oart of the State of Mississippi for an
Injunction TO restrain the President and
commanding general from its enforce
Rent has undoubtedly led the origina-
tors to perceive that Congress and the
neople are in earnest in settling upo
.ome feasible plan for the reorganization
of the governments OF the rebellious
States and give them republican form
based upon the great principles which
the civil strife has practically settled and
nut an end to the vexed questions which
have unsettled the nation for more than
thirty years,
Chief Justice Chase in delivering the
opinion Of the court, confined the in
ouiry to the question presented IN the
objection made by the Attorney General
to the granting of the Injunction, that
the President cannot be restrained from
the performance of his duties as Execu-
tive of the Government, by an injunction,
from carrying into effect an act OF Con-
qress, and leaving without an expression
OF opinion the question, whether in any
case the President of the United States
NAV be required by a process issuing
from the supreme court, to perform
purely ministerial act required by law,
or NAV be held amenable in any case
otherwise than by impeachment for
crime. The single point for cOnsldera-
ton was, therefore, can the President be
restrained from carrying into effect an
act of Congress alleged to be unconsti-
tutional? The assumption Of the Mis-
sissippi counsel, was that the President
in the execution Of the act is required
to perform mere ministerial duty.
After defining the duty assigned as
simple, definite duty imposed by law In
which nothing is left to discretion,
and citing decisions in the support Of the
position, ne describes the duty Of the
President to be to see that the laws are
faithfully executed, and that the duties
imposed on the Executive. under these
acts. can be considered no other than
as purely executive and political, and
that an attempt on the part Of the ju-
dicial department to interfere in their
performance would be an excessive and
abused extravaganza, and that the same
general principle is applicable in the
question Of restraining the Executive
under legislation claimed to be uncon-
stitutlonal
The rights and duties Of the legisla'
tive, executive, and judicial departments
of the government are clearly set forth
in the opinion, arriving at the conclu
sion that the application in its present
form cannot be made operative agains
either the legislative or executive
branches of the government, and leav,
to file the bill for injunction is denied
A hearing in the Georgia case is TO b,
granted, but there can be no expectation
that the Injunction asked for will b.
allowed, whatever may be the opinion 0
the court in reference to the c0nstitu
tionality of the law. 1t would seen
from the opinions expressed in all quar-
tiers that Congress has given US bette
measure than either they or the peOpl
anticipated, giving the South an oppOr
tunity to escape from their political di
lemma without any responsibility @
their own This is the aspect in whic
the matter is viewed by leading South
ern men, as will be seen in the eXtraC
which appears in our columns to-day
written by Hon, J. Q. A. Fellows Of Ne'
Orleans, and is the advice given by thos
who have to bear and witness the prat
tical operation of the laws, and hav
resolved to calmly accept the posItio
AZ the best course for them to pursue.