Year: 1863

character, to protect the rights and liber-
ties of citizens imperiled By this action.


These are the most prominent and vital
considerations involved in the discussion.
There arc numberless other important ones,
q few of which we will present, without
the incumbrance of legal phraseology, yet
endeavoring to initiate its provisions.


If the President had authority to sus-
pend, it was subject to the supervision of
the judiciary, because, whenever an exec
utive officer supposes case has arisen au-
thorizing him to act, the citizen may ap-
peal to the judiciary to determine whether
in fact that supposition be true. This is
an inhexible rule of law, for the obvious
reason that to allow the same person to de-
clare conclusiycly the existence Of a case
authorizing him to act, and the limits and
extent of the authority he may exercise, is
to permit despotism pure and simple.


Our judges being invested with super
visory, and, in its practical operation, with
a partial veto power, to preserve the in
tcgrity Of government and the rights of
the citizen, they cannot be diyested of
their Offices, or shorn of their lawful au-
thority, in whole or in part, by proclama-
ton.


To suspend the writ in a certain class
of eases is necessarily to impose upon our
courts the duty Of determining whether
the case before them is in fact case with
in the suspension.


We think there can he no question as
TO the right Of our courts to inquire into
the validity of the present suspension. We
have no doubt that had Congress, instead
of the President, suspended the writ, cur
courts might then go back OF the suspen-
sion and decide upon its validity. This
is a point We shall consider soon, as the
whole question is of vital interest and
should be thoroughly canvassed. Wheth-
er Congress *, or is not to be the final in
terpreter Of the Constitution in this. and
final Judge of the necessity demanding sus-
pension, we ask in view of the propositions
here presented, if the existing attempted
suspensiol by the President is not in viola
ton of the plainest principles of the Con
stitution and of law, and tyranny inca
pablc Of justification.


As our courts lavc an undoubtcd right
TO pass upon It's validity, We cannot doubt
that thcy will lcarlessly perform their du-
ty There is no wish, on the part Of the
people or of the courts, to embarrass the
administration in the prosecution Of the
war. To charge such an intention upon
either is an insult to the whole body OF
our Judiciary and to nation that has
given unexampled proofs OF patriotism
There is however, determination to pre-
serve. protect, and defend the constitution.
and rights tried by letters patent and
scaled with blood Of which it is the con
scrvator.


1t is for the administration to determine
whether the suspension shall be manipula-
ted in such a manner as to compel II tria
by force, instead of law, of its authority tC
suspend and power to enforce. We can
not believe it will compel such an issue, be
cause we cannot conceive it to be so insen
safe as not to know that the attempt vii
seal its own destruction The nation vii
meet the question firmly and without pas
sion or excitement. Providing against all
danger, yet fearing none, the people will
neither precipitatc collision nor suffer dss-
potism. They are obedient to law, for
bearing, and ayerse 20 all trials, save those
provided for by law; but when
these are denied, against subversion Of their
liberties they will stand as trees ''moored
III the riftcd rock - Chicago Times