The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1867-01-15
WASHINGTON.
The Occupation of MatanaO-
r0s by Gen. Sedgacick.
Decisions of the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON. Jan. IA.
Mr.. Ashley has been instructed nv the Com.
mlttee ON Territories to report his Amendment
to the bill to re-establish civil GOVERNMENT in
North Carolina, as substitute for Mr.. Stevens
Dill now before the House.
~ Is understood that the President has nom
mated to the Senate Edgar Cowan as Minister
to Austria
The Government income exclusively from
tnn a revenue sources, ON SATURDAY, was
300, 40827; making total since July lst, OF
Sl15,471 1890; leaving Si0O,ooo0oo 70 Dc col
complete the estimates of David A. Wells
Commissioner of revenue
The manufacturing, trade and agricultural
interests show contlhueu enlargement, activity
and enterprise.
In answer to a request, the President sent to
the House to-day communication from Cen
eral Sheridan, dated New Orleans, December
2lsi, in which he gives the result of his trip to
the RIO Grand explaining that the motives
which induced Con, Sedgwick to take possess
SION OF Matamoras were unknown to him, but
he alleges that the reason was the protection
of American citizens, with their PROPERTY
lie thinks that Gen. Sedgwick was made
cats paw of by the merchants of that citv
some of them claiming citizenship being ultra
Maximilian's adherents, and late blockade run
ners. The occupation of Matamoras was a
mere form to which Escobado made no obiec-
tons There is no doubt that this unauthor-
ward reconciling and bringing about the good
state OF affairs existing in Matamoras when
Gen. Sheridan left Brownsville enabling hin,
to release Ortega who had but few friends on
the Mexican side after the suppression of the
Canales uSurpatiQn.
1t apears that 2S6, 496 persons arrived in the
United States from foreign countries the past
year, $4,000 of whom went West
Associate Justice Field to-day delivered the
opinion of the United States Supreme Court
n hn Mtncn nj faCf 1o% y, Tx
a Roman Catholic priest, indicted for preach
ing AID teaching without taking the oath pre-
scribed by the Constitution of the State, being
plaintiff in error, the Court decides that the
test hath in this case is unconstitutional, being
in its nature punishment without trial. and
in its character ex post facto, and as bill of
attalnder. The judgment of the Court below
was reversed, with directions that the plaintiff
shall depart without delay.
Justice Field also delivered the opinion of
the Court in the eX parte cases of Garland and
Mari who having taken part in the rebellion,
ask to be readmitted to practice. The Court
held that as the statute imposes punishment
for an offence which may not have been pun
ishable at the time the offence was committed,
1t Is In It's nature an ex post facto law. Attor-
ncys are moi officers of the United States; they
are officers of Courts and hold their offices DUR
ing good behavior. The Court is not the regis
ter OF the edicts of any other power. The APP
plcants obtained pardon from the President
their offence and made them citizens in the
eye OF the law, what they were before they
committed the committed the offence Con.
gress cannot limit it's prerogative-it cannot
be fettered by legislative restriction, and it fol-
lowed that the prayer of the petitioners must
bh granted the rule which requires an aitor-
ney to take the test oath must be restricted ac-
cordingly.
q Associate Justice Miller, for himself, Chief
Justice Chase and Associate Justices Swayne
and Davis, read dissenting opinion, main
tanning that the practice in Court is a privi-
lege, and attorneys are subject to legislation
the same as judges. The law makes no dis
tnction, but requires all civil and military Off
GERS to take tot same oath. Attorneys exert a
marked influence on the character Of the Gov
eminent. If all the attorneys in the South
had been faithful to their allegiance as they
are required to swear, we should have been
spared the horrors of rebellion. 1t was not
claimed by the majority of the Court that the
law works attainder of the blood, therefore this
is not bill of attainder, nor did it appear that
it convicted and designated persons, or declar-
ed punishment. Persons who arrayed them
selves in hostility to the Government, and
gave aid and comfort to the enemy, forfeited
every right to appear in Court. This was not
acriminal but a civil proceeding, which mere
ly affected private rights, unexpectedly