The New York herald., 1867-01-16

maJoriLy-and here the majority, though only
one-in both cases goes with the Milligan de-
cisions; and all these decisions, while they re-
main unreversed, are the supreme law Of the
land.
What, then, Is the bearing of these decisions
upon the all important question of Southern
reconstruction According to the Mllligan
decision there can be no exigency in the gov
ernment justifying an overstepping of The
strict landmarks Of the constitution. This pro-
nounces the conduct Of President Lincoln in
assuming the powers of Congress, in the alb
sence Of Congress, Ito raise and support
armies" to save the life Of the nation unjus-
tiAable. As the old Pharisees held that man
was made for the Sabbath and not the Sabbath
for man, 90 this Milligan decision afirms that
the country was made for the constitution and
not tho constitution for the country. Accord
ing to these two later decisions neither Con-
gress nor any State can establish any qualihoa-
tions Of loyalty bearing upon the participants
in the late rebellion short of regular trial
and conviction. This may be . strict inter-
probation OF the constitution; bat as . party
accused of treason must be tried in the district
where the overt act was committed, and as
under this requirement no jury can be found to
convict, how is Congress to make any dis
ordinations between loyal citizens and rebels
in tho work of Southern reconstruction?
There is a remedy suggested in Mr.. Justice
Miller's dissenting opinion upon these two
late cases, and in the case which he recites,
Of an appeal to this Supreme Court from fine
imposed upon Catholic priest Of New Orleans
for violating local ordinance relating to flu
neral rites, restricting them under the penalty
imposed to the Obituary chapel Upon this
appeal the Supreme Court of the United States
replied that !" the constitution makes no pro-
vision for protecting the citizens OF the rcspec-
tive States in their religious liberties. This is
left to the State constitution and laws. Nor is
there any inhibition imposed by the constitu-
ton in this respect ON the States" This late
decision touching the test oath applied to a
Catholic priest in Missouri reverses this former
decision; and here lies our remedy. The de-
cisions of the Supreme Court are not binding
upon the court II, therefore, the latest de
cisions Of that body are all tending to the con-
clusion that the late war for the Union was not
only failure, but blunder, which has left
us constituionally just where we stood the year
before the war, we have only to reconstruct
the court in order to reverse these decisions
and to secure such interpretations Of the con-
stitution as will proclaim the great fixed fact
that the war for the Union was neither blum
der nor failure, but a great revolution, the
issues Of which have become the constitution
to the Supreme Court. sa s
This is one remedy, and there is some reason
to suspect that it IN the remedy contemplated
in Congress In the proceedings instituted
for the Presidents impeachment and re-
moval in order to reach this court. But
there is still another remedy. It lies in the
pending constitutional amendment. Uponsthis
platform, in the name of General Grant, as the
candidate Of the Union war party, We are con-
tent to leave the existing deadlock between
Congress ON the one hand and the President
and Supreme Court on the other to the verdict
of the people in 1888 But is there not the
danger in the interval that the Supreme Court
may proclaim some other decisions interdict-
ing all further proceedings in the way Of
Southern reconstruction. We cannot tell
We apprehsnd, however, that this court, with
every decision running in the channel Of Its
last three, is strengthening the impeachment
party in both houses Of Congress.