Morning journal and courier., 1880-03-10

1 FEDERAL POWER AT THE POLLS The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the two cases involving tke constitutionality of the Election laws gives the 1 finishing blow to the Democratic argument
 against these laws, and leaves the Democrats
 no excuse for further opposition to them. The two cases decided cover nearly all the points upon which there has been any dispute on the ground of constitutionality.. One was 1 brought from the United States Circuit Court 1 for Maryland, and is that of five Judges of Election in the city of Baltimore, who were convicted of hindering United States Super visors and Deputy MarshaIs in the perform ance of their duties. The other is that of Judge Of Election in Cincinnati, who was convicted of having violated State law rela- ting to the election of Representatives in Congress. The ground of appeal in each case is that the law of Congress under which conviction was had was unconstitutional in the second case the special point is made that Congress cannot provide for the punishment of an ofense against State law committed by State officer.
 The Court declares that Congress had power by the Constitution to make the Federal Eleo- tion laws that the Circuit Courts have juris- diction of indictments under these laws, and conviction and sentence in pursuance there of is lawful cause of imprisonment, from which the Supreme Court has no power to re- lievs on habeas corpus that though 1t is not necessary, in making regulations for the elec- tion of Representatives, that Congress should assume entire and exclusive control thereof, yet Congress has 8 supervisory power and may either make entirely new regulations or add to, alter, or modify the regulations made by the State; that in the exercise of such supervisory power Congress may impose new duties on the officers of election, or addition al penalties for breach of duty, or for the perpetration of fraud, or provide for the at tendance of officers to prevent frauds, and see that the elections are legally and fairly conducted; that the authority of the National Government in the matter be- ing paramount, collisions between that au- thority and the authority of the States can only occur from unfounded jealousy of such authority; that Congress has power, by the Constitution, to vest in the Circuit Courts the appointment of Supervisors of Election; that the provision which authorizes the Deputy Marshals to keep the peace at the elections is not unconstitutional; and that the provisions adopted for compelling the State officers of election topbserve the State laws regulating elections of Representatives not altered by Congress are within the supervisory powers of Congress over such elections. In short, the decision completely sustains the constitu- tionality of the Election laws
 In the dissenting opinion of Justice Field, concurred in by Justice Clifford, it is held that Congress has no authority over State off, cers; that it cannot prescribe their conduct; that it especially cannot punish them for vio- lation of the State statutes under which they hold their offices.
 The decision of the Court will be received with very general appreciation. As the New York Times says: ''The elections of last autumn showed plainly enough how little im- portance the country attached to the war weged upon the Federal Election laws by the Democrats. Undoubtedly, the methods by which that warfare was sustained were so bad that the emphatic condemnation of the party was due in considerable measure to that fact But had the people been convinced that the laws were an exercise of unwarranted power by Congress, or that they were, as MT. Justice Field now claims, destructive of the rights of the States, and tending to build up central ized Government on the ruins of our present institutions, they would have rendered very different verdict. As it was, they unques- tionably accepted the Election laws as prop CT exercise of legitimate power, intended and fitted to protect the House of Representatives from corruption"
 It will be interesting to watch the effect of the decision upon the Democrats. If they are foolish enough not to respect it and to re- fuse to pass the appropriations necessary to carry out the acts of Congress now declared to be constitutional they will receive their re- ward at the next election. It is not probable, however, that they will add this blunder to their long list of blunders.