Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1867-02-01
For the Journal.
For
The Supreme C0urt-The Hughes ease
travelling out OF the Record.


yond the questions presented for his tle-
csion to pronounce an opinion upon other
matters not necessarily involved IN tho Is
sue. Under our system his duty is simply
TO pronounce what is the law arising upon
a certain state of facts submitted to him
Every postulate laid down by him not pre-
scented by, Or logically springing out Of,
the facts before him, is mere d1cSu''a las
it is technically termed) and of no binding
authority. These dictn will often be found
ed as much, or us little importance as the
character of the Judge may, in the readers
opinion, justify, but they are not dl.ttO7'itu.
It may be, and III revolutionary times tits,
difficult to avoid injermlngllnG political
questions with these Of Il purely legal na-
ture :; but with the former an American
Judge has nothing to DO, except perhaps
where questions of constitutional law may
be involved, wherein he is restricted to the
question OF po2cer, or OF international Law
lis applying between governments. Ii he
discusses the pO}itic0( course Of any man or
party, he soil, his ernlne, and prostitutes
bis Office. Tie independence Of the Judi
ciary is the sheet-unchor Of every free gov
ernment The illustIious Chief Justice
MarshalI said, the greatest curse which
angry Heaven could infict upon a SHINING
people, would be a dependent Judiciary"
No State has ever had Il purer or more
independent Bench than North Carolina.
Chosen for high character and legal at
tainments, and elected by the Legislature
for life, our Judges have been the peers Of
any in America. The opinions of one, at
least, of them have been quoted us author
ity in Westminster Hall, and up to the
present time the judicial ermine Of the
State has been spotless. But we confess to
IL sense of shame and sorrow on reading
the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the
habcus co3,pUs case Of Hughes. published
| in the JOu7uGt OF the 9th inst. Hughes
WAS charged with cheating, by false pre-
! fences, a citizen of New York, and requi-
sition having been issued by the Governor
of New York to the Governor of North
Carolina for him, and having been COM
piled with, ana Hughes having sued out d
habeas co1prS, the only questions present
ed for the consideration Of the Court were
LIST. Was his offence u crime according to
| the meaning OF that word in the United
States Constitution SO as to justify his sur
| render to the Governor of New York p
| And Cd. Could the Governor Of North Car
uiina arrest and deliver Hughes Il second
time, after he had oncebeen allowed to leave
| the State Of New York on bail These
were the only questions presented, and the
Court very briefly decided both in the af-
| firmative.
We deeply regret, for the honor Of tie
Court and the State, that the Judgment did
not end with the announcement of the de-
cision. But, while admitting that no such
points were made i'll the case, the court,
|
opinion" proceed through the Chief Jus.
tice to discuss, at great length, the question
whether Governor Worth is rightfully in
his office whether the Convention of 1866
was Il rightful Convention, Or an "unlaw-
! full assembly," and whether the Legislature
| called by the Convention, and the officers OF
! the State (ipCtmling themselves, Of cOHSe)
were lawfully appointed or elected The
court starts out in consideration Of these
! questions with the admission that ne con-
stitutional law was involved, as the Con-
vention Was ''neither constitutional nor I'M
constitutional. Of course no municipal law
was involved, and rs international law could
not apply, according to the theory OF the
Court, there was nothing left to discuss but
q yucStiOJ4 IF pOtitiCs-and there are two
melancholy columns of this, which will for
ever stand as a reproach upon the pages Of
ooA ''SAiSo '''p ~ pm
essay, they are grossly out OF place :; beng
very weak political essay, they reflect no
credit on the craftsmanship OF the Court,
d'"| 6e'"g ye'er0lIH occe1'Sea| as u repW to "t
anonymous 'testcPol1e,' o7ftcle, con"'so'ty "f-
htb"Fed To ne tate Chtg JHSttce Of He C""1
they stron9ly SAVIOR OF the hustings--
Whether the conclusions OF the Court
on these political questions are night or
wrong, is not a matter Of the slightest
consequence, us they are not binding
The improperly lies IN the expression OF
any opinion at ALL and the Tact thai the
opinion Is lntcrlarfcd With slang phrases
and bad EnGllSh does not alleviate our sor-
row III the least. Nor DO We tina greater
consolation after reading long defense
! OF the Presidents "pollcy in the dis
coVery that thc argument resolves itself
INTO vlndlcatlon OF the authority OF the
court an" finally taperS TO the following
Sichly conclusion: ~ a" efe"S IL seems
TO us entlrely clear that the o1llccfS Oh the
'1t"1o VINO nave peeh oy tills means ana III
'n n. nlahher' CHOSEN ana inoucteo INTO
once nave fl3h'll'i !'lflSalcIlon ana power
TO dlSchatge the dntleS OF thelr reSPeGaEe
ollIces until some other proVlslon snail De
| ~ tlTl ~