The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1867-04-18
-Tba Miaaiaaini naois;oa,.

In the supreme court at Washington,
Yesterday, Chief Justice Chase delivered the
unanimous opinion of the Court in the case
of the State Of Mississippi 0s. Andrew john
son and E. O. G. Ord, on the motion for
leave to file bill to perpetually eDjoin and
restrain the said johnson and Ord from exc
cutting, or in any manner carrying out the
Reconstruction Act. The Chief Justice
said they should limit their inquiry to the
question presented by the objection, with
out expressing an opinion on the broader
issues discussed. The single point which
required consideration was, can the Presi-
dent be restrained from carrying out an
act of Congress alleged to be unconstitu-
tional The Court held that a ministerial
duty, the performance Of, which may, in
proper cases, be required by the head of q
Department, by a judicial process, is one in
respect to which nothing is left to discre-
ton. 1t is simple, definite duty. arising
under conditions, proved to exist. OF i'm
posed by law. The case of Marbury vs..
Madison, Secretary Of State, furnishes an
Illustration. Also the case of Kendall,
Postmaster General VS.. Stockton and
Stokes In the former case, citizen had
been nominated and confirmed Justice OF
the Peace for tine District of Columbia, and
his commission had been made out and
sealed. Nothing remained to be done but
delivery, and The duty of delivery vas inn
posed by law on the Secretary Of State. 1t
was held that the performance of this duty
might be enforced by mandamus. With
the President it is very different. He is
simply to see that the laws are faithfully
executed. By these acts he is required to
assign Generals to command in the several
Military Districts, and to detail sufficient
military force to execute the law, and the
duties imposed on the several Commanding
Generals must be performed under the su-
pervision Of the president as COMMANDMENTS
Chief. 1t is In no sense ministerial. An
attempt on the part of the Judiciary of the
Government to enjoin the performance OF
such duties by the President, might be
characterized, in the language of Chief JUS
tice Marshall, as "an absurd and excessive
extravaganza. The Court justly holds
that Congress is the Legislative Depart
ment of the Government the President is
the Executive Department. Neither can be
restrained IN its action by the Judiciary De
partment, though acts of both, when per
formed, are, in proper cases, subject to its
cognlzance. The improperly OF such IN
reference will be seen upon Consideration
of it's probable consequences. If the bill be
filed, and the injunction allowed, and the
President refuse obedience, it is needless to
observe that the Court is without power to
enforce its process. If the president com
plies with the order of the Court, and refu-
ses to execute the act of Congress.a collision
must occur, and the House of Representa-
tives, the Court holds may impeach him for
such refusal. The Court in conclusion, are
fully satisfied that they have no jurisdic
ton in the case, and the grounds forsthe
decision would seem to be conclusive, also
against the petition Of the State Of Georgia
although the Court granted leave for it tc
be 6led-the Attorney General interposine
no objection. The President is not made
party in the Georgia case.--C6ic. Trtb-
ERe.