Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-05-16
TIE APPEAL TO THE SUPREME
TaNTRE

We give below the condensed argu-
ment Of Judge BLACK, on the question
whether . State a be protected against
deprivation by Congress of all her fran.
chises; and an extract from, and the
conclusion Of, the closing argument Of
the Attorney General. With these, our
readers will be able to understand the
opposite views of the momentous ques-
ton involved:
CONDENSED ARGUMENT OF JUDGEBLACE
The following brief summary of the
points presented by the counsel Of the
state Of Georgia was prepared by the
Hon. J. S. Black. It is marked by his
accustomed clearness and vigor, and to
us seems perfectly impregnable
The State OF Georgia vs.. Stanton, Grant and
Pope;
The points given below have all been
discussed deliberately and ably, but it is
thought advisable TO restate them in s
condensed form for the convenience OF
the attorney general and the judges.
]. We admit that this court has no
authority to control the action Of the
legislative or executive departments, or
70 require either Of them, by any direct
mandate, 10 keep within the limits Of
the law. No matter how clear il NAV
seem to the judges that an act Of con-
gress has been passed which violates the
constitution, such an act does not Of it.
self afford any ground Of appeal to this
court.
,. We DO not therefore complain that
congress has passed an unconstitutional
act but we complain that the defend
ants In this bill have done and threat
ened to do certain things injurious to
the plaintiff. II the defendants have
not done those things, aud disclaim the
intention imputed to them, we viii have
no case.
s. When the party 70 a cause iustifes
himself under an act of congress or an
executive order, II becomes necessary for
the "a 10 pass upon the constitutional
validity Of the legislative act or upon b
legal effect Of the order In question
otherwise the court cannot administer
justice between the parties. In doing
this, the court Is not exercising political
power, but simply performing its own
plain duty, which is entirely judicial.
4. That the decision Of the eourt upon
a question 80 raised may sometimes have
. great moral influence on the exercise
OF power by the political departments d
most true
But the parties in court are not 10 be
their proper measure OF Justice
because the Incidental effect OF a
Just decision may be to promote the
cause OF public freedom. John Ham,
denis right 10 q legal decision In bis case
not, in the slightest degree, inn
by the fact that such 8 decision
would have saved the liberties Of Eoq-
land. This court decided Milligan's case,
although the order 10 discharge him in
a general declaration that fed
,ral officers could not hang their political
opponents without q legal trial, and thus
curtaiied 2 much coveted power.
;. But, In order to give the court iuris-
LECTION, there must be a real case be-
ween the parties properly in the forum,
nd the question must arise ia the regu-
At course Of the cause, SO that the rights
Z the parties cannot be a~seertained with
deciding 1t.
8. In his case the state OF Georgia
her bill setting forth certain
done, or threatened 10 be done. +,
galnst her by the defendants. The de. I,
sncaDts avow their intention TO do what
charged. But they assert their right I