Los Angeles herald., 1891-08-09
A Legal Study Of the Present
Revolution.
The Congressional Party the
Government de Jure.
Points of International Law Which
Apply to the Situation.
An Interesting Paper by Well-In-
formed Lawyer-The Insurgents
Deserving of Recognition by
the United States.
tBY FREDERICK HALL

The congressional party is the govern.
ment de jure. 1t appears from a reli.
able source that President Balmaceda
sent to congress the budget of $40, ,0O0,.
600, which was disappro yed of by that
body. 1t bristled all over with fraud.
Congress then took steps to impeach
the president. He then sent an armed
force to surround congress. Whether
all the foregoing facts be true or not, it
is conceded that he refused to execute
the laws of congress and exercised legis-
lative powers himself.
The position of the revolution is novel
for the books show no parallel case
exactly-where the executive of a re-
public is on one side and the legislature
of the nation on the other, each con-
tending for the sovereignty.
For the solution OF the rights of the
respective combstants let us apply
international law to the facts so far as
the same can be understood from gener-
ally recognized principles and analogy.
s'Cicero, and after him, the modern
public jurists, define state to be a
body polite or society of men united
together for the purpose of promoting
their mutual safety and advantage bv
their combined strength. ."-Wheaton
on the Law OF Nations. The same
writer further observes that "Wher-
ever, indeed, the absolute or unlimited
form of government prevails in any
state, the person of the prince is neces-
sarily identified with the state itself;
L'Etdt c'est moi. Hence the public
iurists frequently use the terms sover-
eign and state as synonymous. So also
the term sovereign is sometimes used in
a metaphorical sense merely to denote
state, whatever may be the form of its
government, whether nionarchical or
republican or mixed"
1t will be noted in monarchical govern
ments, the person of the prince is
necessarily identified with the state.
In republics the identification of the
president holds only so far as the con-
stitution empowers him to act. He cam
not say, "L'Etat c'est moi'' Il am the
state), while bills to become laws are to
be signed by him, yet congress may
pass them over his veto-hence in the
making of laws he may have but little
to say. In speaking of the veto power,
Story says: "The superior weight and
influence OF the legislative body in
free government, and the hazard to the
weight and influence of the executive in
trial of strength. afford a satisfactory
security that the power will generally
be employed with great caution.'
Thus it is apparent that the general
opinion and intention OF the people is to
invest the law making power in the
legislature of the country, and not in the
executive. He is to see that the laws
are faithfully executed. What laws?
Why the laws of congress; not the laws
of the executive. He has no power to
fo-bid the execution of the laws of con-
gress.
In Kendall vse United States, 12 Pet.
524, the supreme court of the United
States said: SIT was urged at the bar
that the postmaster-general was alone
subject to the direction and control of
the president, with respect to the exc
cution of the duty imposed on him by
this law, and this right of the president
ls claimed as growing out of the obliga-
lion imposed on him by the constitution
TO take care that the laws be faithfully
executed. This is a doctrine that can
not receive the sanction of this court.
It would be vesting in the president a
1isper sing power which has no counten-
ance for it's support in any part of the
and is asserting a principle
which, if carried out in it's results to all
:ases falling within it, would be clothing
;he president with a power entirely to
control the legislation of congress, and
paralyze the administration of1iustice.
sTo contend that the obligation inn
posed on the president to see the laws
executed implies a power to
orbid their execution, is a novel con-
ltruction of the constitution, and en-
;irely inadmissible.
What constitutional power has Balma-
:eda to forbid the execution of laws
passed by congress, and to enforce his
,wn, or those of congress constituted
" himself? What right under the con-
titution to impede the process of i'm
'eachment by military power? He said,
4 am the state" and proceeded accord
ngly.
Il the United States under President |
lis trial on impeachment that if found |
utility an armed party would have come
o his rescue. Suppose conviction had
dktu DldCc, dlQ ulo dIhCo lilCdO6 lidu |
allied to his rescue, which party
you'd have been the rightfully
enstituted government, the congress
{ the union, or the president as exec
tive officer, claiming his trial and inn
,eachment to have been unlawful?
Which party would foreign governments
ave acknowledged as government de
ure? Would not every Union man in
he country have supported the congress
+ the unionb Was Balmaceda clothed
With the power to control the legislation
i congress and paralyze the administra-
ion Of Justice? The supreme court OF
he United States answers no." by |
heir decision above quoted. Why should
he political department of the United
jtates differ from the judicial depart
nent in it's conclusion OF the acts OF
Wheaton says in his Law OF Nations:
Until the revolution is contaminated,
whilst the civil war involving contest
or the government continues, other
tates may remain in different spectators
4 the controversy, still continuing to
reat the ancient government as sover-
ion. and the government de facto as a
ociety entitled to the rights OF war
,caiust its enemy; or may espouse the
.ause of the party which they believe to
laye Justice on its side."
"Still continuing to treat the ancient
as sovereign" What was