Des Arc weekly citizen., 1867-09-07
NOTES ON THE SITUATION
BY 8. II. HILL.
NolS.

 not become court or judge in the matter. Neither can Congress be court. But it was necessarysthere should be Q final arbiter, and therefore. the Constitution IAovided a third department of government called the Judicial. This Judicial power is expressly declared to extend to all cases arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States and trea- ties, etc. etc. But here again difference have arisen. and it has been insisted that the word ceases" has legal tech nical signification and must be confin- ed with it. and, therefore. that the judicial power does not extend to all questions arising under the Constitu- ton. This position was favorite one with persons of the strict construction State-right school.
 When South Carolina declared the Tariff Act plainly and palpably uncon- stitutional she refused to refer the question to the Court, but proceeded to nullify the act n'her borders. The Union men and Federalists insisted that she could refer the question to the Supreme Court as the final arbiter, but South Carolina refused to do so, insisting that that State was an inde- pendent, seperate sovereignty outside of the express powers granted to Con gress--that this was d political ques- ton, affecting her seperate sovereignty, and that she would not permit any other power to sit in judgment upon questions involving her sovereignty :; that in this respect South Carolina e+nnI fo fba Irn,fad Statps as she did to France or England.
 It was supposed that the peculiar doctrines of State Rights had been de- cidcd by the war against the position taken by South Carolina, and that hereafter the Supreme Court would becoine-what the old Union man al- ways contendcd it was intended to be -the final arbiter upon all questions arising under the Constitution, so as to leave no excuse or necessity for an ap- peal to arms to settle controversies between the General Government and the States.
 Georgia and Mississippi were the first to get on the new idea. They did what South Carolina refused to do.-- They applied to the Supreme Court Gin, 1 th:ak, a proper case made) to enloin the enforcement of bills palpably itutional-admitted to be so-- in their borders. The reply was, the question made is political question. and not judicial case. The Supreme Court refused to entertain the jurisdic- ton, and thus simply affirmed what was called the ultra State Rights doc Urine of South Carolina. l am glad the quostion was presented. lam especial ly glad they were presented by south ern States, showing a disposition there by to abide the decision claimed to have been made by the war. andIo recognize an arbiter of future disputes short of arms.
 These decisions, therefore, so far from Showing there is no remedy against these Military Bills, shows clearly the reverse. They proceeded on the very basis that the States are still separate political communities, and as such it necessarily follows that their internal domestic governments cannot be abrogated, regulated, or interfered with by Congress, Hence the way is clear for every State. citizen and cor poratiou to make case and test these Military Bills, when any person, by their authority, shall interfere with q right of. property, or of person, or oi liberty.
 I, therefore, beg ever citizen, black and white, even the humblest of the ten millions who inhabit these ten States. to mefnher-nevcrfo forget that it is his right--his glorious, unimpeach- able right-to resist every interference, by any officer, high or low, with his property. o. his person, or his liberty, under these Military Bills; and that each citizen owes it to every other citizen and to his State, and to posterity and to Constitutional liberty, to assert the right boldly and fearlessly against every such interference. Nor have military officers ill such case one par tiele more of protection from such resistance than civil officers. The law is superior to all--is master of all and the strength, the majesty and the merit of the law, make the citizens panoply in this issue. Hear what distinguish ed American writer says on this sub- iect:
 Tt is now settled in England and the United States, that an officer of the forces who executed the unlawful or der remains personally answerable. Ii the highest in command, the British monarch himself, orders, contrary to law, an officer to quarter his soldiers upon the citizens to annoy and oppress them, as Charles I did, the officer re- mains responsible, in the fullest sense of the term, to the law of the and.- All that has been gained by the ardu- ous protraeted struggle which began 4. Al et, o,.lx- lor Y Charles l, may be summed up in the few words, that the law shall be supe- rior to all and every one and every branch of Government; that there is nowhere mysterious, supreme and unattainable power, which, despite oi the dearest law, may still dispense with it or arrest it's course. This is the sum total of modern civil liberty, the great, firm and solid commons lib- erty."
 Our Constitution-our supreme law, which no Congress, nor President, nor other earthly power can violate or au- thorize to be violated with impunity-- is our rule, our only ruler, and all the highest e-holders-civil and mili- tarv-are but its servants and bound, under penalties, to obey it's commands.
 Our Constitution declares---
 The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in case of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."
 .'No bill of attainer or expost facto law shall be passed.
 ssThe trial of all crimes, except in case of impeachment, shall be by jury.
 No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner.
 ing tho freedom of speech or of the press"
 No citizen shall be held to answer for capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentnent or ia- dictment of grand jury"