The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-12-08
DEVENS INSOLENOE.

DlIlCb vi hbtDIuey utuSidi VI bbp oHl"7p
States, has made his annual report to Con
gress, wherein he complains that the powers
of his department are too limited and the
processes OF the Federal courts altogether
Inadequate to admit OF the efficient enforce
ment OF the revenue and election laws In the
Southern States. Mr. Devens did not sue
esed so we'll In using the Federal election
laws. through his paid supervisors and mar
shals, to defraud and intimidate the people Of
South Carolina and Louisiana at the last
election as he had used them In New York.
and he Is unhappy about it. lie should have
remembered that this sort Of thing was new
to the people Of New York, but we have had
experience In such matters that proved val
liable to us In this instance.
Mr.. Devens Is evidently Of the opinion that
Phil. Sheridan's methods are the most eff
Gent In dealing with the South, and he pro-
poses to engraft them upon the Federal statu-
tory law. He accordingly goes to Congress
with some very extraordinary propositions,
which, were they acted upon, wou5d enable
Mr.. Devens to set up a new reconstruction
programme OF his own, scarcely less subver-
siye OF all local authority than that through
which the South has just passed. He declares
that murder and perjury are crimes against
the United States and not against the States.
and IL the jurisdiction In cases Of persons ac-
cused thereof Is not taken from the State
courts, that it will be impossible to enforce
the Federal laws In the Southern States. He
then modestly announces that he has inaugu-
rated a crusade against the Democratic voters
e In n
the Republican party, and that he ex-
poets Congress to vote him def
cheney fund to pay the spies and informers
employed as supervisors at the last election
to prepare perjured testimony for this pur-
pose, and to defray the costs Of these pro-
ceedings He finally tells Congress that he
must have the use OF the army-oan't get
along without 1t, and that the act forbidding
the use OF the army as a posse comitGtus must
be repealed. Never before has an American
Congress been submitted to such unmeasured
insolence as is contained In these three propo-
sitions.
In regard to the first Of them, Mr. Devens
says, under the head of Protection to Civil
Officers" that additional provision should be
made for the protection OF the executive civil
officers.
"Thc punishment now attached to resist
ance to the process OF the United States
court" he says, lis not proportionate to the
crime of murder, which, In frequent instances,
has been committed upon deputy marshals,
because they have arrested, or endeavored to
arrest, violators of the law. 1t should not be
left to the State to determine and enforce the
penalty for an act against the execution Of
Justice of such serious character, but appro-
pirate legislation should enable the court,
whose authority has been defied, and whose
faithful officers have been killed, to admins
ter the penalty which the crime deserves. 1t
Ia unfortunately too clear that II this duty
be left to the courts Of tho States it cannot be
expected that In certain portions of the Union
it will now be faithfully and efficiently per-
formed"
This is all very startling doctrine to Ameri-
cans. We have heard some such twaddle
from Phil Sheridan, who proposed to try the
White League by drum-head court martial
and shoot the "bandtu'' on tho spot From
this ignorant and brutal swashbuckler moth
ing better was expected and his proposition
overcame us by its laughable absurdity and
without our special wonder But we were not
prepared for such stuff from the lips OF al
American lawyer sufficiently learned and
prominent to be made the Attorney General
of the United States and the constitutional
adviser of the President.
We do not know which of his statements
are the most to be admired that the States
are not competent to deal with such a grave
offense as murder; or that other, that State
courts cannot be expected to convict and
punish in such cases, and, therefore. they
should be left to the jurisdiction Of the Fed
eraI courts, which will do SO.
Mr.. Devens must have indicted this last
recommendation in moment Of temporary
alteration 1t had passed, out of his memory
for the time being that trial by jury Is con
stitutional right assured by the most solemn
guarantees. He must have forgotten that Q
Jury drawn from the vicinage must sit in al
such cases, whether tried In a Federal or
State court. This jury must pass upon thu
guilt or innocence of the accused and there Il
no other process known to American juris
prudence OF administering "the penalty which
the crime deserves whatsoever that crime
may be- There is no reason why jury com
posed of citizens Of the same vicinage. If hon
esty drawn should discharge this duty NOR
faithfully and efficiently" in Federal thai
in State court Unless the Federal Judge b.
paid executioner and his court organized t
convict, his rulings must be the same as thos
| OF the State Judge upon all questions o
technical procedure, and In accordance witt
the same great principles Of the common law
| Mr.. Devens must have forgotten all thes
facts, as well as the great and enduring prin
ciples which have given them sanctity n
American judge, legislator or executive dar
to violate, for certainly he would not have tn
audacity to go before the Congress OF tn
United States and deliberately ask for thei
subversion as essential to the administration