The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-07-02

Sss bus s ot ior r0Gi iSe future nSs Gn Sss Tn stord." Likewise the rules which reguA late and severn as in our gFsat sntsrs hs granting power and there restraining authority, from precedent to precedent build up the. great edtaoe in which tns people dwell and which We cal tns
 The Supreme Court had many cases before t gToowing out ot Acte of Soas .ns ana comfort to the snernise Of the United States, and also providing Tor the malo and disposition of the proceeds Of sale cf prcperty, acandon.e1 in s sne sns Eouthorn people eotncided with tne drawing back of its armies Into thas ever narrowing circle wherein the des- fra tSs dsnns isss rsiiy I Of the Scots upon the fatal leld of Flodden.
 m the case of Mrs. Aiexander's cot. sPt,cle DH us sus,ecs ecs'Gca tO capture apt % on land
 tain huraor in the report of it. t ap- psared that Mrs. Aiexagasr .s hsd 2 haRds sSs ciairnea iS go to n be loyal but it was prov ed that many young confederate otfi- eers visited at her home Then It vas number of younE ladies staying with her. Now can any one picture gray jacket and Nold-iASs brushing Ghoulders sysr 60 tightly with sko, e94I 0rSandas Seen. ena Ssans ScsouSly r1SVHns RlVing aiiesiSnee to at least tho preamble to the Constitution of the United states. as 1t declares that more perfect union and insure domes- tic tranquility? Az it was In the days of Noe and shall be when the last this groatast Of all civil conflicts they did eat, they drank. they married had been fulIy restored various sfforts were made to enforce q civil liability for damages against those who had been active participants in hostiiities. cenfedsEats oficsE s.,,>1, was sued ,s,s r.s .Sr ton under orders of his superior, the purpose being to prevent 1t falling into the hands of the Federal forces. On Mslne as S'"ST was "snei sued in New orieaaS. the claimant alleging that a certein cap- tain in his command had ratded the plaiatiff,s plantation @ @snd carried oss Ins nis their way to the Supreme Court. and with the same result in poth. The court held that no civil remedy Tn dam. ofhetwise would, in the case of the Confederate soldier, render him liable to be prosecuted for murder for kll-
 Pg sn FsS.ss 5Ssy n soldsq Ssls oGa S rsaSsrs him to answer for his military conduct to a tribunal which could not possibly sit ia Judgment upon his conduct. One can hardly imagine tho fieod-tiae or litigation which would have been open ed by a contrary decision In eitner case.
 ments growing out of iesislation epaet- ed during and in consequence or the war are those In reference to tho ds- cal power of Congress.
 The credit of the Government was protected by the court in holding that there was no power in the State % tax any obligation of the United states. And again. the power to estaoiisn Na- tional banks was fully deterr.sned. In the same direction was the decision holding that Congress might lay such tax on the notes of State banks as to drive them out of circulation. and in this way room was made for Govern. Ynent and National bank currency. Oi course the greatest of these fiscal cas-. es is the one involving the right oi Congress to give a legal tender quAl. ity 10 paper money. On this the Court exhibited a most radical difference among It's members. This is not un. usual. But tn a 0ae0u4 eaee the Cour'