JLeciql polices. Divorce Notice i. IN the Court of Common Vlens of Hlk CO.. Va.. No. 7. January term, 1SU7. Mnry Moniiran. by liei-next friend, vs. Michael .Monizan. The undersigned, appointed 1y the said Court, to take I ot iinony in Hie above li vorco case, hereby rivcs notice to those in. tercstod, tlmt ho will attend at Hie liouscof Mrs. i:ii7.nbcth Winslnw, in lbnojett, 121k oomitv. IV. on Tuesday, (lie 2nd day of .July next, for tho performance ofsai'1 duty. jun'27'67 to. Commissioner. IN the Court of Common l'lcns of I21k co., ln No. 15, November term. lbt- j03 T. Hnnonl.l vs. N.mcy M. llatiotiM. The undersigned, appointed by tho uni.l rourt, totnke testimony " Ihn ahovo Di vorce case, hereby uives nonce lo those in tercstcd, tlmt he ill atlci. I to the perfor. mnneeofsi.ildu.y, ut Oysters Untcl in )ox township, 121k county, Fa., on Monday, 4he -t'th lfl V of .Inly next. JOHN C. McA ..LISTER, jup2',-tc. Commissioner. 1" "N the Court of Common Vlensnf Elk co., Tiv., No. 14. November term, IHtlti. iliniot McCulloiiirli, by her next frietul, Jacob Fields, vs. Julius MeCnllough. Thctinderoijrncd, Appointed by the paid Court to take testimony in the nbovo vorce case, hereby I'ivos notice to those in terested, that he will attend to the perfor manceofsaid duty, nt Oyster's Hotel, in Fox township, F Ik county, Fa., ou Monday, .the 2'Jth dav of July next. "JOHN C. McCALMSTER, jun27'o7ti Commissioner. MAKY MON ID AN, " In the Court of By hernejrt friend I Common Fleas of Elk co. No. 7, I January terni,i7. MICHAEL MON 10 AN, J Subn. iu Divorce To Michael Monigsin : Take notice that you are required to appear at tho terra of aid Court to be held at Kidgway on the first Monday of August next, to answer the complaint of the libelant in this case. Sherill 'a Office, 1 J. A. MALONE, Ridgway, July 5,'C7 Sheriff. BegUtor'i Notices. T0TICE is hereby given that J. W. ISrown nnd Charles Winslow, admin istrators of the estate of I2ben V.'inslow. de ceased have tiled their accounts in my office, und that liie samo will lie presented nt t lie next term of the Orphan's Court for eentir. niation. (!EO. A. UATIi I'.UX, jur.l7'C7te. Kcgialcr. "VTOT1C12 is hereby given that iliotnas SchlultenhotVor and Francis Sclilu t tetihotTer, exoeuiora of the last will and testament of VY'diVan; ScliUittcnhofVtr de ceased, have l':h'd tlieir accounts in my of. lice, and that the same will be presented at the next term of Hie Orphan'sfnuit for confirmation. tiiX". A. 11 AT Illll'N, j uly 11 lifti" Register. Lissolutiot o Partnership. milE" FAllTNKUi-'lIll' heretofore exist between the undersigned has been this day dissolved hy mutual consent. All per sons having unsettled accounts with said firm are re.jue.-ted to iiiaV:e itmmdialc pay inent to Short & Wilo.i:;, iu whose hands the books arc left for colled ion. joiin Dor.rit. 0. F.LANCHAKD. junc 25, IN!" julllOtpd. TJOTIC12 OF DISSOLUTION. THE partnership heretofore existing be. tttcen the undersigned, under the firm name of Durdwell & Messenger, is this day dissolved by mutual consent. The books and accoiinis of the Into firm remain in the hauda of (J. C. Mcsscnster for settlement. j, s. f.o;uvi:ll, U. 0. MESSENGER. June 3d, lPOT.llt. TTTM. M. flNC.EULY AND JOSEPH KMIKIW'IT.ICK have tit's day with drawn from the .ii ri of .Short, Ha'lit Co. The undersigned remaining co partners wl.l continuo the V iahiii-r lutsin". tinder the old Una na:;:-.-. Sii'. :'!', MALI. .V CO. S. rWIOET. JN'). :. HALL, L. YOLI.MI2II. May 2 i, Y.7 tf. J. K. 1'. HALL. ' slT'l'LK "tTpT npilK HUM t)F FoilliV.'ELL it M1C8- 8E.CiElt having been this day dis solved, all persons indebted to said linn are requested lo la. ike immediato settlement with the undersigued, in whose hands the books ure left for that purpose. U. 0. MESSENGER. June 3d, 18i;7-tf. I 1ST OF CAUSES SFP i now u i'r i rial ai auiisi .e.sioiis, i ooi , tockdalo . llowocr v:. Mcsstnga' i. llawlo Same vs G. D. Mcsseii rer. F A Leash vs Jos' ph Vi'iinlfoMer. E O Clemeiit i vs L Arner et nl Adam Keiumercr vs M'Cuuley ct. al. James iV 12rovu vs II Woodward S S May vs J Elliott I'hines' administrators vs J N Breedin ct al Joseph YVilhelm vs James Phelvy Alfred Coxe et al vs Englaud liiown J C Chnpin's heirs vs iiryaut Euwer John Tudor vs 11 Woodward et al Aiuliew Erehm vs Eeii.inger Coal 4 Ironco T Jackson et al vs ij nniiurigui Charles 1M1 vs James Wurner ct al T)Y VIRTUE Ob' SUNDHY wrils I ) ot Yvwlitioni Exponas, issued out of tho Court of Common l'leas of Hlk county, and to me directed, there will bo exposed to l'UH LIC SALE at the Couit House in llid-way, on Mon. day, tlm h dnj of Amjunt m:xt, the followit)!! described Heal Estate, to wit : All that certain lot or pi ee of ground ..'.....in iii itiohorouMi of St. Marv's. eouiii v of Elk, and Statu of Pennsylvania, boundeil and described as fallows Ueginning at n liost ou Hie suitlli uric ot line ot me run a. & Eric railroad thence toulli Si" 30' eimt 10S feet 7 inches lo a post on Wcis & Ei u ner's line, thence along mid lino north Co0 ir,'iiiii r, t'..i.i M inches lo a nost. thence north 37 lit)' west IVi feet and 0 in. lo it post ou (he south line or I lie raiiroau ulore Kuid. thenee along said suuih lino of said , oi,l CO fi ei lo tlio LlauO of Lei'iiiuiU'J a ..... - - . t containing S.',7o square ieet, cxelusivo ot (lie road lo tiie lailroaa Ucpoi. upon wuicu is erecleil one two story building wiih stone biiseineiit . caloiiliitU'l lor a sun eiiouse one ,,.... in Imlf lui i 1.1 1 ii ir uilhslotio base- meiil occupied us u d lling house, with stone foundation for another house M-itcd and taken iu execution and to be sol I as the properly of Juhn llauli lit the suit of Siegcl & Seoll. JAS. A. -VI VI.UAC, M1C1IU. -7i)A! CUKE AND FI HI2-CLA V ! y Allot' superioi ipialiiy, for sale by tl.o Tanncrdale Coal Company, M. .ilury f, r.lH. i.ciiiny, l a. J8Q" (Jrdci by inail pruniptlj ittend cd to. sepAlO S-tl ii i , m WW JOIINO. HALL, Proprietor. JOILXr. MOORE, Publisher. VETO CF THE KECOKSTBTJCTION BILL. To the Hovae nRrjn-cscntotivcs of the Unhid Slates : I return herewith tho bill entitled "An net supplementary to an act cn. titled an net to provide for the more eflicientgovemnicntof tho rubel States," passed on the 2d day of March, 18G7, and tho net mipplemontary thereto, passed on the 255d of March, 1SC7, and will state, as briefly as possible, gomo of the reasons which prevent mo from giv nig it my approval. This is one of a series of measures passed by Congress during the last four months on the subject of reconstruction. The message it-turning the act ot 2d of March last states at length my objeo. tions to the passage ot the measure: they apply equally well to the bill now beforo me, aud L am content merely to reler to them, and to reiterate my con viction that they are sound aud unan swerable. There are somo points pecu liar to this bill which I will proceed at once to consider. The first section purports to declare the true intent and meauing, in some particular!), of the prior acts upon this subject. It is declared that tho iutent of thoio acta was, first, " that the ex isting governments in the ten rebel States " were not legal State govern ments j and seeoud, '" That thereafter said governments, it continued, were to be continued subject in all respects to themilitury commanders of tho respec tive districts and to the paramount authority ot Congress. Congress may, by a declaratory act, fis upon an act a construction altogether at varience with its apparent meaning, and from the time at least when such construction is fixed, the original act will bo construed to rnotin exactly what it is stated to mean by the declaratory statue. J nere win bo then, Iroin tho time this bill may be. come a law, no doubt, no question ns to the relation in nhich the existing gov ernments iu those bti.U'8, eaiieu in tue original act the " provisional govern ments " stand toward the military au thority. An their relations stood before the declaratory act, these " govern. ments, it is true, were made subject to absolute military authority n many important respects, but not in all, the language ot tho act being, " buujcct to the military authority ot tho united States as hereinafter preset ibed." iSy the sixth scotiou ot the original act tiiese governments weru maae " to all respocls Eubjcct to tne paramount authority ol the L mtc l totatcs. xxow. by this Ueclatory net it appears thai CougrcHs did not, by the original act, intend h limit the military authority to any particulars or ftibjeels therein " nroscii'jcd." but meant to make it uuiversal. Thus, over, all these ten States, this military frovcrnmcnt is now declared to have uuhimted autuonty. It is no longer confined to the preser vation ot the public peace, the aamin istration ot criminal law, the registra tion of voters, nnd the superintendence of elections, but in all respects is assert ed to be patamount to the existing civil ooverutucnts. It is inipossiblo to conceive any state of tocicty more iotol era n than this, and vet It 13 10 tins condition that millions of Amcricttu cit izens are reduced by tho Congress of tho United States. Over every foot of the immeu.ie territory occupied by tueso Amcruau cmzeua the Constitution ot tho United States theoretically is in full operation. It bindi all tho people there, and should protect them ; yet they are denied every one cf its saeied guarantees. Of what avail will it be to any one of these Southern people, when seized by a file of soldiers, to ask tot the cause of arrest, or for the production of the warrant ? Of what avail to ask for the privilege ot bail when in tuili tarv eustodv, which knows no such thinir as bail ? Of what avail to de mand a trial bv jury, process for wit nesses. a coov of tho indictment, tho privilege ot counsel, or the greater pri vilc-'C the writ of habeas corpus ? Tho vctoot tho original bill of tho 2d of March was based ou two distinct grounds," tho iuterl'eienco of Congress iu matters strictly appertaining to the res rved tiowcrs of the States, and the esUb'.ishii.ci.t of militar tribuuala for the trial of citizens in time of peat e Tho ini) artial reader of that message will understand that alUhat it contaius with respect to military despotism and martial law has reference especially to the fearful power conferred ou tho dis trict commanders to displace tho crimi nal couris und assume jurisdiction to trv and to punish by military boards ; tha't potentially the suspension of tho hubcas corpus was martial law and military despotism. The act uow beforo me not only declares that the intent was to con fer buch military authority, but also to confer uuliuiited militaiy authority over all tho other courts of tho Stato, and over all the officers of the State, legisla tive, executive aud judical. Not content with the general grant of power, Congress, iu the second sec. tiou of this till, fcpccilioally jivco to RID G WAY, PENXA., each military commander tho power to " suspend or remove from oflico,or frcm the performance of official duties and the exercise of official power, nny officer or person holding or exercising, oi profess ing to hold or excrciso, any civil or mil. itary office or duty in such district un der nny power, election, appointment, or authority derived from or granted by or claimed under any so-called State or the government thereof, or any munici pal or other division thereof," a power that hitherto all the departments of the Federal Government, acting in concert or separately, have not dared to exer cise, is here attempted to be conferred on a subordinate military officer. To him, as a m'litary officer of the Federal Government, is given the power, sup ported by a " sufficient military force," to remove every civil othoer of the State. What next 7 .The district com mander, who has thus displaced the civil officer, is authorized to fill the va. cancy by tbo detail of an officer or sol. dior of tho army, or by tho appointment of somo othor person. This military appoiutce, whether an officer, a soldier, or some other person, is to perform the duties ot such orhcer so suspended or removed. In other words, na officer or soldier of tho army is thus transformed into a civil officer. fie jiay be made a governor, a leg islator, or a judge. However unfit he may deem himself for such civil duties he must obey the order. The officer of the army must, if detailed, go upon the supremo bench of the State with tho samo prompt obedience as if he were detailed to go on a court. martial. The soldier, if detailed to act as justice of the peace, must obey as quickly as f he were detailed for picket duty. What is tho character of such a military civil officer ' This bill declares that he shall perform the duties ot the civil office to which he is detailed. It is clear, how ever, that he docs not loso his position in the military service. He is still an officer or soldier of the army, lie is still subject to the rules and regulations which govern it, and must yield due deference, respect aud obedience to wards his superiors. Tho clear inten tion cf this section is that, the officer or soldier detailed to fill a civil office must execute its duties according to tho laws of the Stato. If he is appointed a gov' crnor of a State he is to execute the da tics as provided by the laws of the State, aud tor the time being his military character is to Tjo suspended in his new civil capacity. If he is appointed a Stato Treasurer he must nt once assume the custody and disbursement of the funds of tho State and must preform these duties precisely according to the laws of the State, for hois iutruted with no power. Holding tho office of treasurer, aud entrusted with funds, it happens '.but he is required by the State laws to enter into bond with so curity and to take an oath of office yet from the beginning of the bill to tho end there is no provision for any bond or oath ot omce or lor aay single quail fication required under the State law, such as residence, citizenship, or any. thing eiso. The only oath that is pro vided for ia the ninth seotion, by the terms ot whicti every one detailed or appointed to any civil office in the State is required " to take and to subscribe the oath of office prescribed bylaw for the officers of tho United States." Thus an officer of the army of tho United States, detailed to fill a oivil office in one of these States, gives no official bond and takes no official oath for tho per. formance of his new duties, but as a civil officer of the State only takes the same oath which he had already taken as a military officer of the United States He ib at least a military officer perfor iniug civil duties, and the authority un. der which he acts is Federal authority ouly, and the incvitablo result is that the Federal Government, by tho agency of its sworu officers, in effect assumes the civil government of tho State. A singular contradiction is apparent here. Congress declares these local State governments to bo illegal govern. luents, and then provides that the illegal governments are to bo earned ou by l'cdcral officers, who are to perform the very duties imposed on its own officers by this illegal State authority. It would be a novel spectacle if Congress should attempt to carry on a legal Stato government by the agency of its officers. It is vet more strange that Congress attempts to sustaiu aud carry on an illo gal State government by the same Fed. cral agency. In this connection I must call atten tion to tho tenth aud eleventh section of tho bill, which provides that none of the officers or appointees ot these mill tarv commanders " shall be bouud in their action bv any opiniou of any civil officer of the Uuited States, and that all the provisions ot the act shall be con strued liberully. to the end that all the intents thereof may be fully and perfeo tly ctrricd out." It seems Congress supposed that this bill might require construction, aud they fix, therefore the rule to bo applied, iiut where is tho coLtU'uc;iuu to come horn '( Ccr fa m 4V mm AUGUST 1, 1867. tainly no One can be moro in 1want of instruction than a soldier or an officer of tho army detailed for a civil service, perhaps the most important it, a State, with the duties of which he is altogeth er unfamUiar. This bill says he shall not bo bound ia his action by the opinion of any civil officer of tho United States. The duties of the office are altogeth er civil, but when he asks for an opin ion, he can only ask the opinion of an. other military officer, who perhaps uni dcrstands as little of his duties as he does himself ; nnd as to his " action," he is answerable to the military authori ty, and to the military authority alone. Striotly, no opinion of any civil officer, other than a judge, ha3 a binding force j but these military appointees would not be bound, oven by a judicial opinion. They might very well say, even when thoir action is in conflict with the Supreme Court of tho United States, " that court is composed of civil offi cers of the United Statos and we are not bound to conform our action to any opiniou of any such authority." luis bill, and the acts to which it is supplementary, aro all founded upon the assumption that these ten communities aro not States, and that their existing governments are not legal. Throughout tho legislation upon this subject they are called rebel States. Aud in this par ticular bill they are denominated " so called States," and the vice of illegality is denominated to prevado all of them. The obligations of consistency bind a legislative body as well as tho individ uals who compose it. It is now too late to say that these ten political communii ties aro not States of the Union : Dec larations to the contrary in theso acts are coutradicted again aud again by reputed acts of legislation enacted by Congress from the year 18G1 to 1807. During that period, whilst these btatcs were iu actual rebellion, aud tfter that rebellion was brought to a close, they have been again and again recoguized as States of the Union, llcpre.sentation has been apportioned to them as States. They havo been divided into judicial district and circuit courts ot tho United States, as States of the Union only can be districted. Tho last act on this subject was pass. ed July 23, 1800, by which every one of these ten States was arranged into districts and circuits j they havo been called upoQ by Congress to act through their Legislatures upon at least two amendments to the Constitution of the United States ; as States they have latified one amendment which required the vote of twenty.seveu States of ths thirty-six then composing the Union ; when the requisite tweuty-seven votes were given in favor of that amendment, seven of which votes wero given by seven of thes ten states, it was proclaim, cd to bo a part of the Constitution of tho United Stales, and slavery was declared no longer to exist within tho United Statos or any place subject to their jurisdiction. If these seven states wero not legal states of the Union, it follows, as an incvitablo consequcuco, that sla very yet exists, it does not exist in these seven states, for they have abol ished it also in their own stato Constitu tions,but Kontucky, not having done so, would still remain iu that state. Hut, in truth, if this assumption that theso states havo no legal state governments be true, tlicn the abolition of slavery by theso illegal governments binds uo one, for Congress now denies to these states the power to abolish slavery by denying to them the power to elect a legal state Legislature or to frame a constituaion for any purpose, even for such a purpose as the abolition of slavery. As to the other constitutional amend ment, having reference to suffrage, it happens that these States havo not ac cepted it. The consequence is that , it has never been proclaimed or understood even by Conr ts to be a part of the Constitution of the Uuited States. Tho Senate of tho Uuited States has repeat, edly given its sanctiou to the appoint, mcutof judges, district attorneys and marshals for every one of these States, and yet if they aru not legal States not oue of these judges is authorized to hold a court. So, too, both Houses of Coi gross havo passed appropriation bills to pay all theso judges, attorney aud offi cers of the Uuited States for exercising their fuuetiotis iu these States. Again, iu tho machiuery of the internal reve uuo laws all theso States are districted, not as Territories, but as. Stxlci. So much for contiuuous legislative recogni tion. Tho instances oiteJ, however, fall far short of all that might be enum erated. Executive recoguitiou, as is well known, has been fiequeut and un wavering. The tame may be said as to judicial recognition through the Supreme Court of the Uuited States. That august tribunal, from first to last, iu the admin istration ot iu duties, in bauo aud upon the circuit, has never failed to recognize theso ten communities as legal States of he Union. Tho ca.scs depending iu that court upou appeal and writ of error from these States when the rebellion began, have not Lccu diiiuLsea upon I I I nl l n.fl M i . t'j i i ju ii it rt i .riii i Ef m VOLUME SEVEX-XUMDER 21. TERMS 1 50 PER AXXUM. any idea of the cessation of jurisdiction. They were carefully continued from term to term until tho rebellion was en tirely subdued aud peaeo re-established, and then they were called for argument and consideration, as if no insurrection had intervened. New cases, occurring since tho rebellion, havo como from theso States before that court by writ of error and appeal, and even by original Buit where only a State could bring such a su)t..' lhcso case3aro entertained by that tribunal in tho exercise of its ac knowledged jurisdiction, which could not attach to them if they had come from any political body other than a Stato of the Union. Finally, in the allotment of heir cir. caits made by the judges st the Decern ber term, 1800, every one of these States is put on the same footing of legality with all othor States of the Un ion. Virginia and North Carolina, be ing a part ot the fourth circuit, are al lotted to the Chief Justice. South Car olina, Georgia, Alabama, .Mississippi and Florida, constitute tho fifth circuit, are allotted to tho late Mr, Justice Swayne, Louisiana, Arkansas and Texas, are allotted to the sixth judicial circuit as to which there is a vacancy ou the bench. The Chief Justice, in th excr cise of his circuit duties, has recently held a Circuit Court in the State of North Carolina. If North Carolina is not a Stato of this Union, the Chief Justice had no authority to hold a Court there, and every order, judgment nnd do jrec rendered by him in that court were coram non Judicc cl vidui. Another ground ou which these re construction acta aro attempted to be sustained is this : that theso ten States are conquered territory : that tho con stitutional relation in wnich they stood as States teward ths Federal Govern ment prior to the rebellion, has given place to new rtdation : that their tern. tory is a conquered country and their citizens a conquered people, and that in this new relation Congress can govern thorn by military power. A title bv conquest stands on clear ground ; it is a new title acquired by war. It applies only to territory, lor goods and movable things regularly captured in war are callod " booty," or, if taken by individ. uai soldiers, " plunder. ' There is not a foot of the land in any one of theso ten States which the Uuited States hold by couquest, save such land as did not belong to either of these States or to any luutviutiai owner, i mean sucu laud; as aid ueiong to tne pretended govern. ment called the Confedorato Stales. These lands wc may claim to hold by conquest; ; as to an other land or ter tory, whether belonging to States or to individuals, the Federal Government has now no more right or titlo to it than it had before the rebellion. Our own forts, arsenals, navy yards, custom-hous es, and other federal property situate in those States, we now hold, not by tho title of conquest, but bv our old title acquired by purchase or condemnation to public use, with compensation to for mer owners. We have not conquered tnese places, but have simply " rcpos sesseu tnem. xr we require more sites for forts, custom housc3 or other public uso; we must acquire tho title to them by purchase or annronriation in the regular mode. At this moment the United State3, in tho acquisition of sites for national cemeteries in these States, acquires title in the same way. The Federal courts sit in court houses owned or leased by the United States, not in the court houses ot the States. The United States pays tach of these States for tho use of its jails. Finally the United States levies its direct taxes and its internal revenue upou the prop . . .I.e. I , .. erty in tnese orates, inciuair.g tne pro duction of tho lauds within their terri tonal limits, not by way of levy and contribution in tho character of a con queror, but iu the regular way of taxa tion, under the samo laws which apply- to an tue otner states ol tho Union From first to last, during tho rebellion and since, tho title ot each of these States to the lands and public buildings owned by thein has never been disturb. ed, and not a foot of it has ever been acquired by the United States, even under a title by confiscation, and not a foot of it has ever been taxed by Fed eral law. In conclusion, I must respectfully ask the attention ot Congress to tho tousid cratioii of one more question arisintruu der tins bill: It vests in (ho military commander, sunject only to tho approv al of tho General of the army of the United States, un unlimited power to re move from office any civil or military olhcer in cacti ot those states, and tb lurtncr power, sutjject to the same ap proval, to detail or apnoint nnv miiitarv officer tr soldier of the United States to perform the duties of tho officer so re 1 li r 1 1 ii mover, nou to nil an vacancies occur. ring in these state by death, resignation or otherwise, llic military appointee thus required to ler'orm the duties of a civil officer, according to the laws of tho state, and as such required to take an oath, is, for the time being, a civil offi cer. hat is Lis character f Is he a civil officer of the state or a civil offieor of tho United States ? If he is a civil officer of the state, where is the Federal powor under our Coustilutiou whioh uu- thonzci his appointment byauy Federal officer t If, however, he is to be con sidered a civil officer o! the UniL-cl States, as his appointment and oath would seem to indicate, where is tho authority for his appointment vested by the Constitution ? The power of ap pointment ci an oiucers ot the United States, civil or military, where not pro vided tor ia tho Constitution, is vestei iu the President, by and with the ad vice and conscut of the Scuate, with this exception : that Congress may, by law, vest tho appointment of suoh infe rior officers as they think proper in the President alone, in tho courts of law, or iu tue ueaus ot departments. Uut th a bill, if these are to bo considered infe rior officers within the meaning of the Constitution, docs not provide for their appointment by the President alono, or by tho courts of law, or by tho heads of departments, but rests tho appointment in one subordinate executive office, sub jeet to tho approval of another subordi nate exccutivo oiiicer ; so that if we put this question, and fix the character of this military appointee, either woy this provision of the bill is equally op posed to the Constitution. lake the case of a soldier or officer appointed to perform the office of judge in oue of these states, and as such to administer the proper laws of the state, whore is the suthority to be found in tho Constitution for vesting in a military or an executive officer strict judicial func tions to be exercised under state law ; it has been again aud again decided by tho suprenn court of the United states that acts of Congress which have attempted to vest executive power in the judicial courts or judges of tho United states aro not warranted by tho Constitution. It Congress cannot clothe a judge with merely executive duties, how can they clothe an officer or uoldier of the army with judicial duties over citizens of tho United states who are not ia tho military or naval service. bo, too, it has been repeatedly decid. cd that Cougrcs3 cannot require a state oiliccr, executive or judicial, to perform any d uty enjoined upon him by a law of the United states. How, then, can Congress confer power upon an cxecutivo officer of the United states to perform such duties iu a state ? If Congress cculd not vest in a judge of one ol these state, by direct enactment, how can it accomplish the same thing indirectly by removing the state judge and putting au officer of the United state in his place ? Jo me these considerations are con clusive of tho unconstitutionality of the part of the bill now beforo me, and I earnestly commcud their consideration to the deliberate judgment of Congress. Witnia a period less than a year tho legislation of Congress has attempted to strip tho executive department of the Government of somo of its essential pow ers. It is to be feared that theso military officers, looking to the authority given by these, rather than to the letter of the Constitution, will recorruize no authority but tho comniandor of the district and the General of the army. If there were no other objection than this to this pro posed legislation, it would be sufficient. Whilst I hold the chief executive author, ity of the United S'tates j whilst ihe obli gation lests upon me to see that all tho laws are faithfully executed, I can never willingly surrender that trust, or the powers given for its execution ; I can never give my i.ssent to bo made respond sible for tho faithful execution of laws, ami at the samo time surrender that trust, and the powers which accompany it, to any other executive officer, high, or low, or to any number of excoutive officers If this executive trust, vested by the Constitution in tho President, is to be taken trom him and vested in a subordi nate officer, the responsibility will bo with Congress, ia clothing the subordi nate with unconstitutional power, and with the officer who . assumes its exer; cise. This interference with tho con stitutional authority of the executive departmeut is an evil that will eventua lly sap the foundations of our federal system, but is not the worst evil of this legislation. It is a great publio wrong to take from the Prosident power con. fercd on him alone by the Constitution. But tho wrong is moro flagrant and moro dangercus whec tho powers so takeu from he President are conferred upou subordinate cxecutivo officeis, and especially upon military officers. Over nearly one-third of the states of the Uuiou military power, regulated by no fixed law, reigns supremo. Each one of the fivo district commanders, though not choscu by the people or responsible to then, exercises at this hour more executive power, military and civil, than tho people have ever been wil ling to couf'cr upon the head of tho axecutivo department, though chosen by and responsible to themselves. Tho remedy mutt come from the peoplo t'leinselves. They know what it is and how it is to bo applied. At the present time they cauimi, according to the form of the Coiittit ltiuii, repeal these laws. They cujimt remove or control this military despotism. Tho remedy is nevertheless iu thoir hau ls. It is to be found in the Lai Lit, mid isn furfl ouo, if n it cunt rolled by fraud, overawed by arbitrary power, or from apathy on their part too long delayed. With abiding ,mli lenco in their pa triotism aud integrity, 1 urn still hopeful of the tuture, aud that in tho end t'vt rod uf despotism will be broken, ifia armod heel ot power lifted troiu tin neck of the people, nnd the principle! of a violate! Constitution preserve 1. V A.NJJKtW Jou.nson.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers