Year: 1867

The Supreme Court adjourned yesterday till D or
cember, but before closing the session settled -
nay no doubt, the attempt to prevent the c


fOrCement of the Reconstruction law. The hstC.
ry of injunction bills is one Of weakness legally
and morally. When, over the veto of the Presi-
dent, Congress passed the supplementary Recon-
struction bill, the South yielded at once Such
law had been known to be inevitable; more than
this it was felt to be Just. There were few men
in the Rebel States who did not well know that
over their heads hung the sword; that the United
States had the right and the power to impose all
the penalties OF treason and that confscatlon and
the division of lands were q punishment from
which at least no legal appeal could be made.
The extent of the punishment was question OF
mora Is more than of law, OF generosity more than
of justice. Davis, Stephens, Lee, Johnston
Hampton, were all men whose lives and property
the Government held at its mercy. 1t spared the
men, it spared the property and the terms 1t fl
naly required were felt not to be so much pun
ishment as precautOn. Therefore when the
South was placed under temporary military rule,
when the ballot was given to the Freedmen, and
the method of restoration was prescribed, the
South was ready to yield, and did yield quietly,
though there were men and journals who did
their utmost to organize resistance. Lee, Jolh-
ston, Hampton cOunselled submission; most OF
the Southern Governors advised the people, OF
their States to take part in registration, and for
NAL opposition began and ended with Gov. Shar-
key OF Mississippi, and Gov. jenkins of Georgia.
More dangerous opposition, it is true, is emDOd-
led in the brutal murders negroes we have from
week to week reported, and In sssuch bloody riots
as that at Mobile last Tuesday, but that may safe
| ly be left to the law itself to subdue.


The sole hope of those who thought that direct
resistance might be made, was in opposing to one
branch of the Government coordinate branch


in putting the Supreme Court against Congress-
All the traditions of the Supreme Court were in
their favour; but, as it has proved the law is not
| Even the Attorney General, contessing that his
| sympathies were with those who denied the cons
titutionNty of the law, was obliged to oppose the
suits brought by his friends The Georgia inIunc-
tion bill was dismissed, on the main ground that
the Court had no jurisdiction in the matter and
yesterday the motion for leave to amend the Miss
issippi BILL so as to Obvate certain legal objec-
lions, was refused by majority of the Court, and
| the bill dismissed. Thus ends the solitary hope Ot
nullifying the laws of Congress and the will OF the
loyal people. In law the question is settled, we
presume, forever in fact, it can only be Illegally
disputed by riot or new rebellion we are not
sorry that this attempt was made to set aside the
Reconstruction law by means Of the Supreme
Court for its failure must convince all the citizens
of the Rebel States of the absolute necessity OF


submission. They know now, If they did not be-
fore that the will of the people is not to be turn
ed bya quibble and that the method oil recon-


struction is fxed.--N. Y. Tribune