The New York herald., 1867-04-13
WASHINGTON. w
CONTINUED FROM THIRD PAGE.

pras,dant "s the United states It is true, tho
learned commentator confines himself 70 eish LIABILITY.
/ think without any difficulty be mieht nave ex-
tended Il 70 criminal abilityi and will say OF the
President as said of Sir Frederick Bruce that u me
presdent should SO far forget himself In moment OF
passion a. to commi. If you please the high crime OF
MURDER he could not be tried for while he was Presi.
sn n,,,ou and the nation deal with him they
allow 4 court 10 with him. They say - long as tns
.nytbipg unI we deal with him. when deal with
him and remove him. and strip from him the robes OF
% ssG ssrs h Sa noe nns iii nsa Was be
dent he not murderer In the eve OF the iaw ns -
NAV have done punish him for it individually, but take
NOT from him the nvolabilty OF his Office. Next, II
- nnanswerable upon the ground the suit here
against the President yet 1t Is not dncuh 20 show that
the fact Is inc ns jus, ~ Sa
record sSd for his au,hOy this
your @ Tho
came up there In suit M aga, against s. the Governor
State and the Court says, Chief Justice Marshall dev
ing the opnIon-"The claim upon the Governor is ss
Governor. He 10 sued not by his name but by his fte
The demand upon him Is not made personally but
ofncally." It seems the suit was against him Cover
individually. Here the individual Is named but ho IS
pamed President and the suit against BIN Is IN his
ssains, the the person, but against tho onlcsr, as il
the laws, for tho Individual has no power to
cute any law In such case. where the
u
name but BY his style Of once and the claim made upon
him is entirely nl his ofcal character, think the
Again cn i2 Peters oiO the court say rhe executive
power vested n tho President as far as his power Is
Of any other department except IN the mode prescribed
by the constitution through the mpeaching power
There y ns As no beyond The Control ont o.
psa'hng ,ms,r power For what so,s = be reached By
o $ ss
highest crimes and msdemeanors. he is above Prcs
dent; the power o. any court Or any other department
Done while he Is President May it please your Honors
far this bill seeks to make the President party
have said from the nrst that It was scan
tho taste with which this bill drawn, not
70 use the word in its common vulgar acceptaton but
court ia the United States for one moment sua.
tain Therefore it Is that as amieus c'ra or as law
Che first motion made 70 file this bill, to attempt TO
keep so scandaious thing from the records Of this
Instruction Of tho Presdsnt that appear here 70
make this objection. should have felt bound to
government but this must say in defence Of the
President Although the gentlemen, IN their bill
constitutional when the President did that he did every.
thing that he intended to do in opposition these
there was but one duty in his estimation resting upon
him. and that was faithfully 10 carry out and execute
these laws He has instructed sa that max ng
objection for purpose OF escaping
any responsibility either TO perform or to refuse 70 per-
form.
ARGUMENT R. J. rErI.
II the Court please, the discussion OF the pre.im-
nary objection presented by my learned and disiin-
gushed BROTHER the Attorney General, divides itself
properly into two paris-Firsi, whether under the
constitution OF the United States the government tho
United States be sued in any tribunal. State
sional; and, second whether bill to restrain the Pre-
vtoFt tad Axv;n
this court, from carrying into effect act Of Congress
forbidden by the constitution and therefore uncons,u
tona and void. being proceeding cnjoin the Presi
dent from the performance Of ministerial duty
tfor by his veto he admits It TO be moro ministerial
duty which he is compelled by law to dol In fact
proceeding against the government or the United States
and whether such bill be entertained by this trbn
nal These questions depend upon the proper
sarucon Of the constitution Of the United States and
therefore becomes necessary for read although
b so familiar 70 the Court, that great clause creating
The judicial power After reading the various clauses Of
article third OF the constitution, he proceeded to point
out the difference between the words used In the grant
Of original aud appellate Jurisdiction -"In all
affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and con-
sus, and those in which State shall DO party the
not confined as was the appellate Jurisdiction to the
eases before mentionedn in the preceding clause so
that the Court had original jurisdiction in any in
which State party, unless expressly restrained
by other provisions OF the constitution. In those
where the Court had original jurisdiction by the const
sutton II exclusive. II vested directly by the
constitution, and could neither be impaired nor des-
troyed enlarged diminished, Affected In any
BY any act Of Congress- Another source OF jurisdiction
in the present might be derived from tho clause
which the United States Is a party. Can the United
sates be suod under that clause OF the constitution On
opinions II has constituted the Court Of Claims and
granted an appeal from It TO the Supreme Court
The ATTORNEY G GgSERAf-Aliow me TO say, thst Is by
consent. sovereign can consent to be sued mt any
time. and waive hts dignity The President cannot
beg refer the gentleman authority tha, did not
read when up, Howard, 2ss where the court say,
sTherc Jurisdiction Of the case In the Circuit
Court as the government not liable sued except
with its consent given by law, nor can decree or
Mr. wxrxrs-If the court please, / epti ely concur
with my learned brother that the government cannot
Se ~ - ac may ar
consent by an act OF Congress When comes TO the
eosr sDdoaS.y there mS Be an scs Of
bat what call the attention OF the Court to this that
sSe Sovernmcn, Of The United States Congress- msy
grant Jurisdiction TO individual corporation to
shc United States directly in the inferior courts OF
Union; but II cannot gve such power for State
% sue, because 10 oil cases in which State Is
party the jurisdiction is conferred exclusively TO tis
court BY an original bill II. then, au individual
. corporation may cue tho government OF tho United
states In OF tho Inferior courts. unless State
the Supreme Court Of the United States would b,
the rcsutf What would be the consequence OF such
construction OF the coustisusous Take the OF
bonds q government OF the United States disputed
like those issued Texas According to this doctrine
an individual corporation holding such bonds may
for the recovery Of them in Tho Court of
Claims; but n sovereign State, or any
number OF States, hold ,hese bonds, even to
much larger amount there IS no rcmedy whatever.
Siorys Commentaries, vol 3, sec ld7l-I5. were re.
fcrrcd TO- 10 show that in the opinion OF learned
commentator, Congress might provide for suits In the
federal courts TO establish claims on contracts OF The
general goverument In note section 1908 the
arthor quotes Mr. Tucker referring 10 the word
'conlroversics IN the judicial clause including such
disputes as might arse between The United State: and
any States respecting territorial or
fiscal matters or between the Uuiiei States and
their debtors, contractors and agents Here Is
very high authority cited, apparently with appro-
baton by the learned commentator, covering
shis exact case that that clause giving jurisdiction
~ coniroversies In which the United States il party
aoes embrace states as well as individuals IL 80, the
quesuon whether that section Of tho constitution
, wnch gives 70 ms Court by original proceed ~,