Daily Davenport Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1864-1874, 1868-01-24
Tneu. =. supreme Ceurs and sne
dsozclte.

The Go-rtts eives its readers 10 under
ssaud this morning by open confession wna'
20 have long obssrved-thsf It cannot ~
ford % discuss with its eotsmporaries the
po,i,ical issues Of the day. 1t has neither
n. time nor the space, and leaves its read
ess 10 infer that il has not the taste or aoil-
ity 70 furnish facts or reasons TO support its
wholesale assertions.
la our article upon the Supreme Cours
lev days ago, referring to the 0asssfs' AZ"
sle On The same subject. 20 asked our neg"
Dor Z rev questions. hoping TO sl'e. .. ,I ,oy.
thing but boubast and hifA!u'l' -,,- M,
.,.v freedom, and God ana n'"
-. s.,,ed most miserably 10 ara" oa'
49,, ont Of his tsrrapin shell. lie
a.s.es and seeks refuge behind sue'e''usss
and excuses tho most lame.
n. Cs..,fe. referring to the oppoS'iioa
..a, 70 the attempt Of Congress 10 p'a'i-
..w,. N. Supreme Court, itself asked when
had the Supreme Court been in political
,xucA,hv with the people. We asked
Nat meant by it's question, and il itmeans
the supreme Cour, should be made to re-
Acc, The varying and unstable opinions Of
poli,ical parties in this country: We closed
this branch of the subject by asking cur
n.,rhbor what 10 the once Of the Supreme
Cour, IL ii is not to review and interpret
,y..,jons raised before it, as lawyers and
~, - politiciansy' Instead ofanswering the
question preceding, our Deighbor under
tskes 10 dodge and dispose Of the whole
question in controversy by answering to
this last a. follows:
"Bless your heart, that's exactlyiwhAt &c
have been insisting upon, and what Con-
grcss has been endeavorine TO establish,
that the Judges Of the Supreme Court ahall
interpret Is iawysrs, not a. politicians.
II this is what on. n.ighbor 10 working for
Why. ~e venture 70 AJAX again, docs no do
mand that the Supreme Court shall inter
pref the laws in accordance with tho pre-
vailins political opinions Of the country |
the Judges. ~ tho eeurtis organized, do mo-
20 interpret, we msdcstly and deferentially
ask again. 10 not the attempt Of Congress 4
compel then 20 DO IL, an endeavor not 4
secure legal, but political judgments Il
other words 10 il not IN attempt by Con
grsss TO usurp to itself the functions Of tn
Supreme Court, by providing in effect ,ha
. judgment adverse 70 iss political actio
shall not bs rendered
The action Of the Republican party in IL
creasing the number Of justices under NJ
Lincoln'a Administration in 1888 to ter
and in reducing tho number under Nj
Johnacn's Administration to six, shows cor
clusivcly that the party Is determined !
have politicians Of its own class upon tn
Supreme Bench and not lawyers. Why W
tho number Of Justices increased in 1868
il was not to give tho Administration
Mr.. Lincoln an opportunity 10 cast bsll'
In protection Of itself against the probsbl
Judgments Of the Court. Why again va
the number Of Justices reduced by th
Same party in 1866. II not to prcver
Mr.. Johnson from filling vacancies by Ii
appointment Of lawyers who would MOI
probably not give judgments favorable
congressional usurpatious, or course o.
neighbor will not have time TO answer.