The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-10-10
SUPREME cOuar-sPEcnl TERM.
Effect of the Reconstruction Acts Upon q judy.
ment Recovered In Virginia.

Effect of the Reconstruction Acts Upon q Judg.
ment Recovered in Virginia.
Before Judge Sutherland.
Joseph G. Alexander Us. COriOldnIs RusseU.-This
was On action brought on judgment for 81 500 re-
covered in the Hastings Court Of Petersburg, vir-
gna, subsequent to the passage Of the Reconstruc-
ton acts Of Congress. The defendant demurred on
the ground that the complaint did not set up sum-
cent cause Of action, and claims through his counsel
that in order 70 found proper a. ground
court pronouncng tho Judgment had lawful juris-
diction. lStory's Conflict of Laws, Sec 5S6) The
ton may be considered By the tribunal called to
carry Its sentence into effect. tChief Justice Mar
shall, in Rose vs; Himley Crouch, 2eal The com.
was organized, the time OF tho commencement OF
the action and the date OF the judgments ought TO be
notice OF the several acts Of Congress, commonly
called the Reconstruction laws Is advised that the
Judgment In question was rendered OF period sub
sequent to the enactment ofthe said laws.
The obvious INTENT policy and effect OF the Recon
srac laws I'VE 70 M S In s sea
to substitute another system OF government. They
even rcprobate that State government as illegal and
Of the military power and to the paramount
authority OF Congress. The functionaries OF the
OF the military, and its acts in its several depart
ments depend upon the same viii Tor validity ana
effect. The court will take judicial notice OF the sys
TEN OF government prevalent IN Virginia and OF the
events which attend and illustrate ls operation and
those events demonstrate the overthrow Of the State
government and the substitution OF an absolute
military regime er. ar The deposition OF the state
executive officers and the appointment OF success
s0rs by the general commanding, the removal or judi
cal functioIares and the appointment OF other In
cumbcnts by the Same authority, the dlspcnsatlOn
OF the acts OF the State Legislature and the annu
mcnt Of the sentences OF the judicial tribunals OF the
equivalent import which exhibit the complete
usurpation OF all civil and political power
and authority IN the State Even though tho
former State government of Virginia be not abolished
absolutely by the Reconstruction laws they have so
impaired, discredted and reduced 1t to subsection
that only by abuse OF terms It be distinguished
rs government. Clearly its records and judicial
proceedings cannot claim the authority impaired by
article A. section l. constitution United States Tho
action, but In that case the Jurisdiction Of the
court must be derived from those IN whom the power
OF the country Is vested. CIighman, In supreme
Court; see also Migrants Heirs vs. Cooke, OvereOn,
Tennessee Rcports-an instructive case, wherein the
validity and effect OF judgment rendered by
q court Of the pretended estate OF franklin was
challenged and reprlmanded.) Here the so-called
government OF the State OF Virginia Is not de ucto
nor do its tribunals derive their authority from those
in whom the power oithe country ID vested. The lie.
gtmacy and authority OF the state government OF
Virginia have been rcpudatcd elsewhere. Thus in
Oney Is case the Executive Magistrate Of New York
refused to respond to the requialti0n OF Governor
Perpoint the return OF fugitive from justice and
Mr.. Justice Carter OF the District OF Columbia, de-
clined to remand prisoner claimed on similar re-
quisi;ion, but delivered him on the demand OF the
general commanding district No. !.
The Court reserved Its decision.