The national Republican., 1867-10-29
THE COuRTs.

sat q 1anc on Saturday, and acted upon the follow
The case of Adsir Of al, vs. .. browning, Sec.
rotary Of Interior sskne an fpjuhction 70 prevent
the Secretary from contracting for the new jail al
this time, was resumed from Friday, and the follow
Ing opinions were deliyeredi
toHIBP JusficR cAArrEs g OPINION
Chief Justice Cartier said Tho Court are unaui.
meusly Of the opiniOu that the application for an
therefore. be rejected. The sst which provides for
new jail this District, entruas to the Secretary
o. the Interior the supervision Of the work under
rasmsnt on the part Of the Couu IN cautiously az.
ereising limited Jurisdietlon over this oneer In
the case At bar believe It 10 be the judgment Of
eution Of . power 10 one of The heads Of depart.
ments, they make the exercise Of that power amena
BILE 70 tbs Law In all whore The duty eonndsd
ont 0f a trust charged by the Consultation. So far
A. that feature Of tho act giving the Secretary Of the
interior power TO levy taxes Is concerned hold that
levying and collecting taxe. are the highst badge.
Of legislative sovereignty known to eur theory Of
government, and they belong to legislative sover.
eigoty alone; ] have no DOUBT that, under the op-
eratons OF that law, tbs Secretary 10 amenabls 10
the supervision Of the Courts.
The Court have not come to the eonclu,iou they
have in this case from conviction that tbi, law has
been compiled with.
II the charges made In the bill Of complaint be
true, there has b.ea either desgnsd or hee Ile,s
disregard Of the law, and for the purposes Of the
peuliuE utiOIo tno hilfRhIOus taken
to bo true. Itis an sr parts proceeding although
each party has h I'd q hearing. That precautionary
provision in the law, giving fol definite and de.
the allegations Of the bill bo trIs, ha, bssa most
rafelsssiy eulpably omitted In the proposals. for
advancing this work. The Treeautionsry measures
renedI tho owl cf estrAyag.n. add wAst,ful ex
penditurs, II tue allegations Of ths bill be ue, have
been totally disrsgard.d. Asotber condition Of the
of tLia n and iudgaa of of ha slrua
tu'e selected by law are imp ratvely nads parties
In judgment upon the plans. 1t is aot because the
with, or that there may not grea, ml,ehiet to
tho public from the want Of cInPllsnce that the
Court have rejected the motiou for injunction for
taking The S'lsss.iO,. q the sli 70 be true they
BEEN compiled with. Whit has ehidy rulei
the mind OF the Court In tho discrimination Il ha,
PlAinssts, upoa their own .htving, have no stard
log In court The subject Of Tho complaint does not
bring them within reach Of tbs relief they seek. This
law provides for the erection iatl for the Dttret
OF Columbia at an expense " sl0l 900, seeking to
eharse the cost the Federal Treasury aud the Fed
orat city, psyment Of hsi' (tlOO 60 L. lIgsd
upon The eilIsn. and properly Of the district, the
poe Of convenience, aud perhps economy, toe bill
provides for teo paymont by tie Federal Govern
tneet. oct Of the Federal TieIury, Of the whole
amot the Treasury TO be ropad Of the property
Of the District for 100000 Th' eoutrbut0n Of the
coo BY the District 10 mad, subo, dinat TO the
pay mspt by the Federal Treasury Of the whole
amount and 10 treated as q reimsursemsnt; Il hay-
Ing been provided by the bill thateone poraneously
With tho progress OF the struetun, the secretary Of
the Interior might compel the contribution. OF the
moiety Of the District by tex On its citizens and
pr ptIty. This uiiton Of the law raises the ques.
ton, At what p Rod may the cit zen Of the District
supsr1ene for his protection iros ,o alton, II be
interfere at aiI Caa he anu pate hir liability
to the impo-t or IL he postponed inI the funetivl
AIRY Of Govern It sees a. to snores his eUn;tibu-
tion' Nov, we tbbk, " he has standing In court,
"A l.l - N. Il
standing 10 advance on mere hrehieniug. There
must be q personal Liability intact. The burden
must be direct aud attach to him befOre he make
It available as ground for legal Interference. That
me has not arrived, aud by tho light Of suthcrty,
whsu or how sgon It will arrive, sesms to be un.
settled and to be left to the wisdom Of the ehspceor
~ well as the law.
Ths law merely settles that the iaJusties must be
kpon the rAriy and be irrsparN'ls, The geseral
principle ~ cle,rly announced Ia the bJoks; bat
wi EN- II begins aud wheTs terminates l. very din
cult TO determine Il ,esms to tspost poned to the
judgment VI ths chancellor In thssAss enlightened
by tho facts However difieult Is to determine
when It bsg ns, the Court are unau mously OF opn-
Ion 1t has moi begun here. The atsmpt to collect
taxes hiss rot been made, and the iase has not ma
turod. Without attempting q anticipate the Judg-
meut Of the court The time shuuldsyer arr We when
that period begHs, IL is sueeat I, proaouncs that
IL has not yet arrived Aa Lttemr to subject The
people to the ope stion Of rahsgresrd law and the
paym'nt of wA'tsful, Vasrant appropriation Of
unto The day Ia the evil thereof
JUsrICg WILEY OPINION.
n, a. n ,as sCnStSson q The delivery The oPInioa Sy
add something TO what had been sgd
Congress- provided for Ihe o'ectba Of jail here,
aud royided hat the law Shou 10 carried into
ecuou under tie supervision OF tts Secretary OF the
Interior. 1t provided the building should not cost
more than $4,000 that In th, hr.t place tbs
10000 shoud to paid out Of thu Treasury OF the
UsiIed States the TreaSury notes afterwards to be
rel mbuTsCd by taxes levied upop the persons and
property Of the District Of ColuuAia under the di-
rection Of tho secretary Of the Iniaior.
The bill 10 ,h:s cass was died ly certain persons
who allege that they citizens Of the United stAtos
and tsx. payers OF the District II Columbia, and
serk. to RESTRAIN the Secretary from an Illegal de-
p,rture from The duty dsvolyed upon him This
duty the Judge held, was not mere ministerial pro-
cesdins, but was az executive duy. Congress has
the power 10 erect public buldngs to erect Jail,
aud dsyolyes this duty upon the Secretary to b. dis
charged after q certain general plan. The Judge
thought that the duty thus conferred was slearly
executive under the admirable distinction between
an executive aud minitteral duty as drawn by the
Chief Justice Of the Supreme Court In the recent
case Of the state OF MssIssipPi vs.. johnson: "a
is left to discretion Its simple, dsfnits duty,
arising under the conditions admitted or proved 10
exist ana imposed by law
We have no jurisd elton over the case. in my
opinion. These parties come here as tax payers.
IL Ia not tad what kind Of tax payers they are or
how they are Interested whether It Is themselves or
the other parties who, according to The biil are to
come In hereafter, and who possess tangible In
terest in the matter as Taxpayers. do not know
whether the complainauts show thsmse yos Of suii.
snt interest to call out the action Of the court but
do know that It has been held beneath the dignity Of
court Of chanoery act upon nslgnincant inIeres'
such Is In this country do not amount TO $50 and In
to $50. Again. n Ihoso parties have right
to come here as payers Of the DlsiIt they have
the right to come Taxpayers OF ths United states
the principle is the same. And then Secretary
could not build fort or ship, or erect a court
house 10 any part VI the cOuutry but some disap.
pointed contractor In some portion Of the United
States would appear by some friend In some one Of
the circuit urts seeking au Junction the ground
that the Secretary had not complied with the law
and the resui woad be that courts would be turned
from Judicial duties and become executive DEPART
meats, appointing rtceivsrr making contracts atd
cuntrscs, &er generally. The de-
clsions quoted from New York the Justice thought,
were forced upon she courts By ne manifest and out.
mAlpTActees Of the officials and the pressure
Of public opinion But these decisions lad been re-
buked and reversed by the Supreme Couns.
II 10 only when the tax payer 10 hImStUNubJeeted
10 some loss In consequence OF the improper exeou-
lion OF the law that he ask the aid OF the court
For illustration IT, as In this case, Congress had
provided a eertaia site for a jail on some public
observe that provision OF the law and proceeded to
'eiIs private property BY process OF condemnation
DR. without process At all then the owner OF the prope
'rty could come and claim an inluneuon. When an
executive ocor does not conhne himself within the
but abuses It, to the direct detriment Of
pdyate individual, he can be epJo'ned The justice
ioped that, In some way, the erection OF the J.il
ipon the proposed site might bestopPed, for would
DO betereysn to suffer the inconyenienes and inse.
urity Of the present Jail than TO have tho new Ail
quilt at point so distant and unsuitable as the one
proposed,
Mr. Justice Fisher coneurred 10 the Judgment Of
he court, but pronounced NO formal opinion. -