The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-09-03
aFor the Fourth Circuit, Salmon P. Chase, Chief

EPTEMBER 8. 1867.
aFor the Fourth Circuit, Salmon p. Chase, Chic
Justire."
The first section Of the act of Congress of 15tl
July, 1857, passed when rebellion was in full head
way, thereby showing that the interruption OF thi
sessions by rebel violence was the only chang,
which Congress was willing to recognize in the ju
dicial business, provides:
Hereafter the Districts of Maryland, Delaware
Virginia and North Carolina shall constitute thu
Fourth Circuit" (12 Stat, 576.).;
1t is thus made apparent, not only by earlier,
but by contemporaries Legislation, OF the same
session. by the same individual members, and al
most on the same day, that whatever, under the
Constitution Of the United States, either OF au
thority on jurisdiction, attaches to the districts
intended to be, and must be deemed and held te
be, Of full force and virtue now as heretofore But
we have seen that tract OF country, composed Of
States or parts Of States once brought under the
operation the judicial power, cannot, without
revolutionary violence be deprived OF OF exonerat-
ed from it. Violence is the only recognized e1cep-
ton, and that by Congress-, as We shall hereafter
see, is recognized only while the violence lasts,
and then as an unlawful derogation from the judi
cial power.
II it be admitted that the judicial power is in
tact in the district Of North Carolina, though the
subject matters Of it's authority are limited to q
category, it is certain that upon those subject
matters, the courts of the United States for that
district are the supreme authority of the United
States.
The high prerogative OF the Independent judici-
ary may be well illustrated, in closing sketch of
the Department Of Justice, by word respecting
the conclusive and binding charactey OF judg-
ment at law. It may be rendered even by an in
ferior court; but, If the court is competent, the
Judgment may be defined to be the very law OF
the land for the particular matter adjudged "A
Rawle, 1897. To Suspend" q judgment in man.
ner not pointed out by law is therefore to suspend
the law. The Supreme Court says:
'There is no principle OF law better settledthan
that every act OF court of competent jurisdiction
shall be presumed to have been rightly done till
Judgment I remains in force, it is in itself evidence
of the right of the plaintiff to the thing adjudged
and gives him right to process to execute the
Judgment. The orrors of the court, however APP
parent, can be examined only by an appellate
power" (Yoorhees us. Blk. o. g., 10 Peters,
472,47S).
Surely we need not inquire whether the Legisla-
ture of the Union has attempted to vest in par.
ticular executive Of military officers an appellate
power" over judgments, however erroneous" !"
which have been pronounced in court of the
United States. Let the inquiry rather be whether
the right of executing process which has issued
upon such 3 Judgment is anything else but one Of
the very s.rghts Of person and property which, If
the plaintiff seeks to execute 1t within one OF the
DISTRICTS the commanding officer is
charged to- sproteot" by the express terms % OF the
S.) 1t must be beyond dispute, if the authorities
and the statutes which have been introduced are
accepted that the right Of tigating in the Federal
courts, and the right OF being tried in them for
violations of the criminal code OF the United
States and of course, the due conservation OF
their authority in every form, are part Of the
rights to be protected and the duties to be per-
formed By the respective commanders Of the re-
construction districts In this view, the error Of
General Sickles reaches the full stature Of per-
version Of authority, which, persisted in, must
eyying war against the United States, an under
taking which would not for moment be imputed
10 the deliberate intention Of an officer honorobly
for his gallantry in defence OF the
Constitution. es q
But, it might be said, may there not have been
! doubt as to jurisdiction Certainly in this, as
n any other matter there may have been doubt.
But it would insult the intelligence Of the COM
mander Of the Second Reconstruction District to
inquire whether or rot he supposed himself au-
thorized by law to forbid the Supreme Court OF
persons inhabiting the States Of North and South
Carolina, without his consent, Naturally no per-
SON could hesitate whether he had such q power,
without considering whether It was not his duty
10 coerce the Court by arms If 1t should resist
MIN :? We must take it to be certain that it could
not have been in the contemplation OF General
3iokias, when issuing his Order No. 10, to dis
pute with his sword the AUTHORITY OF t,ie Supreme
Bench. Yet,'it is equally certain, that if he had
been disposed to ascertain his authority, through
IN adjudication by acompetent court, q decision
might have been procured with the greatest facii.
a defendant could have r6issd tlIs question
IF jurisdiction in nearly any case ct the term. II
;he Judgment was then adverse to the power of
General Sickles, it must have been easy to pro-
,ure final and conclusive decision in the
supreme Court on writ Of error. II
hat officer had doubt on this subject then, he
must have known the only lawful course for its
solution. Where difference arises between
military agent and court as to the Jurisdiction
IL the latter, and the former presunes to decide
t for himself in his own favor, the act can bear
40 other name than usurpation. But it may be
thought he did 80 only as to the inferior court and
not as to the Supreme Court. Now, though he
nav not have suspected tho fact, moments re-
lection must show that the interference which IN
mder consideration was an interference by Gen.
sral Sickles with the Judiciary, including the su-
,reme Court OF the United States, as whole, and
he force which, through his subordinate, Colonel
Frank was threatened against the process Of the
circuit Court, cannot, think, be distinguished
n law from similar threat, rudely direct
d. to the judges Of the Supreme Court at Wash.
ngton. Tie process, which was In Marshal
4oodIoes hands might, and, indeed, FOR
LQRQI
ssucd in pursuance OF mandate from the Supreme
Jourt remanding cause with directions for
urther proceedings In conformity to the decision
4 that court. A control over such process, as be-
ore remarked of any final process, would be a con-
rol oyer the whole proceedings, and the court it
yer, il final process may be- controlled by the
rider in question, so may mesne process, or any
tep in litigation for the order expressly CON-
aands that certain suits be stayed, and that like
uits, not yet initiated, shall not be instituted. II
he interference of process which is now IN hand
ould be justified, so could an efectua interference,
any stage, and In any case, at his pleasure, ln
be Carolina districts be made by General Sickles
, prevent oil appeal to the Supreme Court. This,
otontially, is oustng the jurisdiction Of the Su-
reme Court itself, abolishing the Federal courts
such in the locality, separating his district In
ne vital particular from the national body polite,
nd depriving Congress. the Executive, and the
eopls, al all means OF enforcing his subordination
) the United States, except by force OF arms. The
irtues Of no man may be permitted to authorize
i'm to aspire to SO dangerous an independence Of
is fellow-citizens,
SO, il there had been doubt whether the pow
ne reconstruction laws, the proper way to solye it
ras the very thing which would be totally occlud-
d by the violent action which has been taken in
he premises, But u there SO much as doubt 2
THE RECONSTRUCTION sTATVTEa.
Three acts Of Congress pass under the designa-
ion Of the reconstruction laws, viz; those OF the
d March, the 23d March, and the 18th July, 1881.
he preanlble of the first declares state Of poli-
al and social dissolution to be impending or
ctually existing in several States Of the Unions
nd that. in consequence Of their condition, and
OF the purpose Of efectng their restoration, the
roposed legislation has bseome necessary. Sup
,osing tho conditions to be as declared in the
,reamnbls Of the first act. these statutes
re to be treated as eminently remedial and
onservative. The States being PROSTATE, in
he opinion Of Congress, the object was to restore
aents Of the Government partock in 20 degree
i the prostration, as would be conceded; and how
nuch did the judicial department partake of ita
Z the object was to reconstruct what had fallen
nto ruin so that it should be restored to good
rider, shall that which is in good order be over-
urnedp Obviously, what was left of order was to
,e conserved. and what was in disorder was to
e restored. In respect to the revenue, the mails,
to-, have heard Of no such destructiye interier-
nee: but in respect to the courts, the disposition
q o,rhihitod To destroy Iat the whole series Of