The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-03-27

the Legislature Of Kentucky against
the wrong done that State in exelud-
ing its representatives from the
House, denouncing it a. unconstitu-
tional, and referred it to the judiciary
Committee.
Also a memorial from the Consti-
tutional Convention of South Caro-
lima. praying for the removal Of all
political disabilities from the several
persons named. Referred.
chandler reported favorably from
the Committee on Commerce, a bill
to prevent and to punish frauds on
revenue aud for other purposes. Re
ferred to the Committee on Finance.
Sherman reported favOrably, from
the Committee oa Finance, a bill to
refund certain duties paid under pro-
test.
Trumbull introduced a bill in rela-
ton to the qualification of jurors,
which he asked to have placed on the
calender. 1t has already been con
sidered by the judiciary Committee.
On motion of Sumner, at II % P M.
the Senate went into executive session.
At l 80 the Senate resumed legis-
lative business, aud took up the Pres
ident's veto pending.
Hendricks contended that the act
Of 1862 does give any citizen the right
of habeds corpus when restrained Of
liberty in violation of the COnstitu-
tiGn or treaties Of the United States;
that this vetoed bill repealed this
provision, which does this indepedent
of all temporary considerations Of
party. The State laws Of 1862 pro-
gided that aliens confined under the
law of the United States, should have
the right to appeal to the Supreme
Court, and in his opinion it gave the
right of appeal In all habeas corpus
cases up to that time, for giving up
the right to foreigners could not be
reconciled with the deprivation of
that right from citizens. According to
the Act of 1856 these cases were
brought in accord with the COnstitu-
ton of the United States. In pro-
viding a judicial system could the
Senator reconcile deprivation of the
right Of appeal with the principles Of
law and justice?
Here the Internal Tax Bill came
from the House, and on motion of
Sherman the Senate nOn-eOneuTTed
in the House amendments and or
dered a committee Of conference.
Hendricks resumed, aud reciting
the McCardle case, which had been
brought directly within the law of
1867. IF he, Hendricks, had occasion
to go South and preside himself in
hostility to the policy of Congress,
would Senators, if he were arrested
by military authorities and appealed
to the Supreme Court, say he should
be sent back to his dungeon Why
was it they were not willing that the
Supreme Court should pass sentence
upon their legislation More than
halt the people had expressed
their opinion against the con-
stitutionality of their legislation.
Yet they talked about all the people
of the United States. They have es-
tablished a system Of despotism in
the South more odious than that of
Haynau, where Senators denied the
Constitutional right of trial by jury,
and made law providing for trial by
a military tribunal. Was it not of
necessity a case for the Supreme
Court to decide which was law? 1t
was an effort to strike down the Ju-
dietary as the Executive had been
stricken down during the last year.
Do that and all the power of the
country will be in the hands of one
department of the Government One
department should be a check upon
another within the sphere Of the Con
stitutiOn.
Stewart said it appeared that the
rights Of man were very much In
volved In this bill, though appeal tC
/ the Supreme Court has been dispensed
with for three quarters Of a century
until last year McCardle haVing
committed an offense which wa,
/ tary authorities, was arrested, tried
and allowed to 90 on bail; and h,
certainly was not, therefore laborin.
under very great disabilities. II,
/ (Stewart) had in that view mad,
/ reference 20 the Supreme Court being
overburdened with business II,
/ said that ii was as much beyond
that Court to binder reconstruction
as it was beyond the power of tn,
humblest individual; therefore, b,
was not afraid of the Supreme Court
The presumption was that the Su
preme Court would obey the law
which was clearly on the side Of Con
/ grcss.
Howard asked what the charg
against McCardle had been.
johnson said the proceedings wer,
GU four grounds, disturbing the publi
peace, melting insurrection, lbelini
a General of the army and obstruct
ing the reconstruction acts
Stewart asked why, If the Suprem
Court had jurisdiction over recon
struction, and the power to declar
war had ceased, it did not exercise