Year: 1879




practical or working agencies of the Judicial
branch. Tine issue thus involved is, simply
aud plainly How far can Congress, intent
ON the Notification of an alleged obnoxious
law, go in the direction of reducing the
Judicial .ordinute-branch of the Gov
ernment TO the comparative insignificance
of one of the Departments of the Executive
branch? Again: To what extent is the
Judicial branch of the Government depend
ent upon, or Independent of the Depart
ment of Justice in the execution of the
laws of the country and the preservation of
its own individuality, integrity and dignity 2


These questions are especially perth
nent to the present situation, IN view
of the fact that the election super
visors are appointed by the courts them
selves, and the deputy marshals by
the marshals, and not by the De-
partment of Justice. In other words,
the appointment of these officials is Ju-
dicial and not an Executive act, and their
acts, after being thus appointed, are of n
judicial character and only by forced
construction can be treated or accepted us
of an executive nature.


To illustrate this meaning let us suppose
that Congress should do some overt act OF
treason or otherwise render itself liable to
arrest or subject TO some process Originate
ing in the courts--could ii pass n
law, or declare situation by process
of Modification like unto the present
situation, which would make it illegal
or which would prohibit the officers of the
courts from serving such processes? If
Congress could do this, it evidently can
| interfere with the Judicial branch OF
| the Government to any extent, and thereby
assert itself as the superior of the co-ordi-
nate branch. As President HAYES says,
"a bare majority" in that body would then
essentially aud emphatically become the
| Government itself.


As the matter now stands Congress ha
evidently attempted to strike down and
abolish the most sacred prerogatives of the
Judicial brunch, the only agencies by which
the courts can maintain themselves and
proceed to the administration of justice in
accordance with the sworn duties of theil
officials. And all the duties, it must be re-
membered, of these officials are performed
under the immediate direction of the courts
themselves, and although the writs they
serve "run in the name of the President
they are only made good and effective by
virtue Of the signature of the judicial Off
Ger which is attached to them.


| IA - 80, 30, I,nt I. I.
be made to impeach any Judge or justice
who would take this view of the case bu
we would like TO see it tried before the eX
piration of the present fiscal year, so tha
we may know what to expect in the
more eventful year Of political campaigns
that is TO follow. If it is u correct view
there is noabsolute necessity for the closing
of the courts, as the Judges are still EN-
powered to order their marshals to serve al
processes and do all duty required to Civ
effect to the laws ofthe land. If any mar
shals should decline to perform such duty TIL
Judge would have his remedy, either by Sc
curing the removal of the marshal or by
designating an especial officer of the cour
to execute its instructions until a marsha
should be appointed, The fact of no none,
being available to pay for such services
would he no excuse, as the United States i
not bound to pay in advance, like privat
suitor before the courts, nor, as we hav
said, is the Judiciary branch, like the execu
tive, prohibited from contracting liabilitie
in advance of appropriations. In this way
and in this way only, can Nullifcation b
nullihed.