The Carson daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1865-1870, 1868-04-01
TIE QUESTION OF JURISDICTION

The untenable positions which the
Democracy have been obliged, step by
step, to recede from, have caused their
final intrenchmen: behind the very bull
varks of Federalism, until they have
virtually repudiated Jefferson and sur
rendered to the EXTREMIST dogmas Of
the John Adams school. The Infamous
bred Scott decision reconciled the De-
mecracy to the doctrine that within the
Supreme Court lay the ultimate power
Of our Government, and they applaud
cd that old Blue light Federalist, fancy,
ard that other one, Buchanan, as the
sacred evangelis,s of a new era and as
having been instrumental in giving an
additional guaranty for the perpetui'y
of % white mans government" I'M
der which " a Niger" has no rights
which q g a Caucasian is bound to
respect. Having come to recognize the
Supreme Court as the paramount au-
shority in the land, they persist in at
sribut;ng to it powers which are at once
absolute and final. Reasoning from
this extreme standpoint, great stress is
laid upon the assumption that the Con
s.itutionali;y Of the Tenure of Office
Bill should be decided before the Sen
ate proceeds to pass judgement, As
Court of mpeachment upon the Presi-
dent, for having violated that law. In
other words, the favorite theory of
tie CoppeTheads new, adopted in order
20 meet the emergency of impeach-
rRent, is, that the Supreme Court is
vested by the Constitution with jaris-
dictiou superior TO, and binding upon,
Al! other Courts whatsoever, and that
ever the High Court of Impeachment
would haze to be governed by its con-
structions of law. Upon this subject
the New York Tribune is practically
clear. 1t says:
All the precedents, as well as all the ar
Suments which have ever been used upon
the subject, show that when the Senate
tries an impeachment, it does so not as a
Legislative, but as a judicial body. 1t is
equally clear that it is not tribunal anterior
to the Supreme Court. Its decisions are
final, and can be reversed by no other body
Whatever. The subjects which come before
il are more important than those which can
be brought before any other tribunal IN
America If it be said that the narrow lin
its to which its jurisdiction is confined make
it inferior, we answer that such an argument
makes the Supre.ae Court of the United
States inferior to the Supreme Court of
Minnesota, since the latter Court has
jurisdiction tenfold wider than the former,
,.s far as mere quantity and variety are con-
cerned. 1t is the quality, rather than the
quantity, of cases coming before court,
which determines its rank. If it were not
50, Justices of the Peace would be the first
dignitaries in the land. But common sense
settles this question. A tribunal which can
By judicial sentence Gepose every judge on
the bench of the Supreme Court, cannot, in
TIE nature OF things, be inferior to the
Judges whom it condemns. If it were, it
would be possible for those Judges, in an
ticipation of their trial, to declare that the
Senate had no power 10 try them; and under
ttls new-fangIed doctrine. the Court of I'm
peachments would be bound to submit to
the decision of criminals arraigned before
it! The Court for the trial of impeach-
ments is, and must necessarily be, the high
est judicial tribunal in the land, taking
counsel from the reported opinions OF every
~ her court in the world, but submitting to
the dictation of none.
Our other points are SO interviewer in
their relations that they must be taken to-
gether. The doctrine that the Supreme
Court has power to interpret the Constitu-
tion 80 as to control the other departments
81 the Government is without warrant IN