Georgia Historic Newspapers

    THE (CONSTITUTION AILST
>
NOTES FOR THE TIMES.
“ The Sabbath was made for man, and not man
for the-Sabbath." Tl»e civil and religion* int-ti
t ittions of any ago Or people are never an end
in themselves. They are. ordered for the well
being and happiness of the age or nation. They
are for the people, not the people for them.—
This established principle-in • all political and
religious economy should serve as a corrective
of a great and miscliievons error into which
thousand# lit this land are in danger of falling.
Since the failure of the South to secure its in
dcpcmlcnoe, the despondency of many lias as
sumed the form of possitlve doubt and skepti
cism. It is the gloomy recoil of disappoint
ment and disaster. This is even the tendency of
tlie human mind. f' ic pendulum of thought
and feeling is never at rest. In all ages it Js tor
ever vibrating from one extreme of its curve to
the other —from religious belief to infidelity—
from enthusiasm aqd confidence, to doubt and
suspicion of every cause, human and divine—
from believing everything, to believing noth
ing. Something like this threatens to develop
itself in the present transition state of society
at the South. A double danger is impending.
The general laxity and corruption of manners
incident to the late war ; and then, this reaction
from a religious faith in the cause for which we
fought threatening to run into downright and
universal skepticism. We have failed; there
fore, our religious education is defective! Slavery
has fallen ; therefore, the New Testament is at
fault! This position lias been gravely assumed
by some professed believers —by reputalde
members of Christian churches; while with
thousands of our young men, the disappoint
ment as to the issue of the late struggle has
come like the death-knell of every cherished
belief mid scriptural assurance. Alas! for the
instability of human nature—for the exhibition
of its weakness and endless contradictions
which, as a people, we would furnish by this
unmanly and unwarranted distrust of Cod’s
word and providence. Previous to the war our
political ami religions conservatism was our
boast —the common subject of congratulation.
'While in die Northern States every flood’tidc of
fanaticism and extravagance found an easy Ice
shore where it swept in jubilant and welcomed,
tee, at the South, presented an immovable bar
rier to every such novelty and innovation. IFe
were the great, conservators of civil and reli
gious truth. IFe, at least, were no disciples of
the higher-law system; and in our very hearts
we pitied the tickle minded and deluded masses
of Hie infidel North. Hut history is ever
malting new and shading developments. A
mighty struggle, unequalled In the annals of
die world, has closed. A disappointment, com
mensurate in degree, has clouded our earthly
horizon. A dreadful shipwreck has covered
the face of foaming waters with broken frag
ments, to which millions of half drowned pjts
sungers are clinging. But there is something
worse than till this material ruin. From our
former stability of religious principles we are
seemingly about to swing into those very ex
tremes of error and skepticism against which,
in other and better days, we lifted up our voice
in suoli loud and earnest protest. To say the
least of it,; it is a position of uncertain equi
librium. 1 lie South to-day is threatened by a
greater danger than any that results from mere
political disaster. From the position of reli
gious indifference into which many arc licstray
ed, we are in eminent peril of being invaded
and overrun by those hosts of fanaticism and
superstition which always, like avenging furies,
sweeps in upon every position of doubt, wheth
er assumed by an individual or a nation. Un
less we beware, we or our children will act over
again, and in some more extreme form nt the
South, which we have sneered at as Northern
fanaticism and folly. And many of our reli
gious teachers, perhaps, are to blame for a dan
gerous and seml-intidel tone of public opinion
Into which their too hasty and confident teach
ings have betrayed an entire people.
\\ e drew the sword ; we appealed in our con
troversy to the God of battles. The battle was
against us. Asa brave and high-minded race,
we must abide by the decision, l.co and John
ston, our best and bravest spirits have set the
example. All must give, in g-ood faith, their
allegiance to the national authority. And yet
while loyalty is a religious duty, a decision by
the sword is never in history the ultinuitc deci
sion ol the rights or wrong' of any controversy.
Napoleon said that Providence was always on
the side of the heaviest artillery. Providence,
possibly, in the sense ol mere temporary suc
cess, hut never in the sense of an ultimate deci
sion on the great pvinciples.of moral right and
wrong. It is not only a heresy in religion, but
a mistake in polities to affirm this. The four
great empires of the ancient wfirld—the Per
sian, Assyrian, Grecian,and Roman, successive
ly overran, each its predecessor, it was no
question in morals on religion ; it was simply
the struggle of the ancient Athletic on a grand
and world-wide scale. The lirst Napoleon
came. All Europe wis at his feet. As the sun
O; Auterht?. rose like* an orb of blood, the Aus
trian eagle flow screaming to the forests of the
Danube, mid even the British lion looked doubt
fully on in his Impotent wrath. It was simply
the problem of superior force and tactics.
Poland is dismembered and destroyed. All
Europe professes to sympathize. Hungary,
alter two or three brave efforts, is bound fast
in the clutches of the double-headed eagle. The
Netherlands, rescued from the grasps of Philip
and Alva, may by the next arrival from abroad,
be reported as under the joint protectorate of
the allied powers. No one dreams of interpret
ing these historical problems in the light of
moral and religious principles. More to the
point still. The Israelites, God's own people,
were not only invaded and Overrun from the
North tuni South by tlte Assyrians ami Egyp
tian-, but they were carried into captivity, for
ioui hundred years at one time, anil for seventy
at another. Anu yet neither bv the willows of
the Euphrates, nor by the reeds of the Nile,
dtd they grow skeptical as to the being of God
and the truth of Providence. And so the North
and Most have overpowered the South. The
issue i« conclusive as to the triumph of arms
and the weight and invincibility of superior '
numbers. The question, too, is settled as to
the duty of loyalty and allegiance. But the
higher questions of right and wrong as to the
moral and religious principles involved in the
controversy, are as untouched and unsolved as
when the first gun was fired in Charleston har
hor. There is for man, in his present limited
field of knowledge, but one criterion and tales
man of truth. It is God’s infallible Word—that
Word which has other and higher objects in
view than the settlement of questions relating
to the best forms of government or the most
approved systems af science—that Word, which
rightly and soberly interpreted, is no more
committed to the perpetuatipii of slavery on
the one hand, than of abolition societies on the
other. There is but one tribunal, aud that to
be erected and revealed only on the overthrow
of all earthly empires, strong and weak, great
and small, from which there can be no appeal.
It is the tribunal of the last, and therefore, the
perfect and infallible judgment.
The social forms and usages in which we were
educated, and to which we cling--with such na
tural pertinacity, w r ere made and continued for
the South, and not the South for them. Divine
truth met and regulated them while they lasted.
Like many civil, political, and religious insti
tutions, they serve their day and generation,
and then give way to other and better forms
and relations of society. The war has settled
the question of slavery. The sword lias been
sheathed, and woe to him who draws it again.
They that use the sword shall perish by the
sword. But another and greater issue is about
being joined; another and mightier conflict
already inaugurated. The tramp ol the gather
ing armies is already iteard —the shout of the
Captains, and the noise of the chariot wheels.—
It is not the gleam of Wei, or the thunder of
cannon. It is the great and decisive conflict of
Wind—the battle that Faith, armed with the
simple panoply of tlic ( Djxine Word, is about
to join with the frowning hosts of un
belief and formalism.' The hostile fleets,
are crowding all sail on the foaming sea, the
decks are all cleared for action. Amid the
thick and portentious signs of the times,
the great champions on cither side, Christ
and anti-Christ, arc drawing nearer .and
nearer. David, with his sling and stone out of
the brook, is advancing to np-et the great Go
liath of evil. The peaceful Dove of a holy and
self-denying religion is no longer avoiding, in
its flight, tlie black vulture of Dell now scream
ing in the heavens. On which side will we en
list ? On the side of a sound scriptural faith in
that word pf the living God which abideth for
ever, on the side of those dark and bonded hosts
Where the spirit of unbelief leads one wing, and
the spirit of religious formalism, clothed like
Satan in the livery of heaven, leads the other.
The temporal reverses of the South should
drive iter millions to Christ. The desolations of
her homeland firesides should prepare, more
speedily and effectually, the way of the Lord.
It is the temptation of her great spiritual enemy
who bids her, “ curse God, and die.” Let us
not justify in its application to our future reli
gious life the remark of Ruskin as to the unbe
lief of Europe, “The red Indian or Otalicßan
lias more sense of the Divine existence than the
majority of refined Londoners and Parisians.”
No—let ns shako off the spiritual incubus which
this war has rolled upon us. Let us busy our
selves with other and higher issues than those
of the passing hour. And then across the mid
night of our sorrow and ruin, the signal lights
will gleam to tell that the morning is at hand.
“ 'The Lord rcigneth, let the earth rejoice. The
Lord reigarth, let the people tremble." “ Shall
not the Judge of all the earth do right ? Let God
be true, but every man a liar. 1 said unto the
foots, deal not foolishly, and to the wicked, lift
not up the horp. Lift not up your horn on high ;
speak not with n stiff neck. For promotion com
eth neither from the East, nor from the 1 Vest, nor
from the South. Hut God is the Judge; He
putteth down one and setteth up another. Clouds
and darkness arc round about him ; righteousness
and judgment are the habitutioA of His throne.
He still an el know that lam God; 1 will be exalt
ed among the heathen. I will be exalted in the
earth. And though He slay me, yet will 1 trust
him."
Watchman.
Legislative Extravagance. —The Macon
Journal ,v Messenger thus discourses on legisla
tive extravagance at Milledgevillo:
“A friend who was in Millcdgcvllle a day or
two sends us the following memorandum,
which will serve the turn quite,as well as our
own words to .the same effect. Surely not a
line need be written upon the inexcusable fault
of extravagance, at a limb when the people are
so impoverished ;
“You can serve Georgia by oaHiug attention
to the extravagant appropriations of ike House
of Representatives. They remind t/ie of the
old times of the Confederacy when money (so
ealled) was worth one hundred and sixty for
one. Members of the Legislature ha\e received
for the past live or six years six dollars per day
and mileage. Now while the State government
is running on borrowed money, and the people
are bankrupt, the members vote themselves nine
dollars per day and mileage. Clerks used to re
ceive seven dollars per day and no mileage. Now
members vote the clerks twelve dollars per day
and mileage. The Chief Clerk of the House
and Secretary of the Senate are each voted
twelve dollars and mileage, and $750 additional
compensation for two and a half months ser
vice. The journalizing and assistant clerks are
voted twelve dollars, and SSOO additional* com
pensation. Members will get for seventy-five
or eighty days' service from S7OO to $l,lOO each.
“There was another matter on foot which
may produce much trouble and litigation, as it
is nothing more nor less than repudiation of
private contracts. It is a proposition to author
ize parties to come in and reduce a note given
before the war for gold, when the owner failed
to return it for taxation as specie, in Confeder
ate times. That is to say, if he returned such a
note for SI,OOO in 1804, at SI,OOO in Confederate
money, it shall now he valued at what Confed
erate money then was worth—say four cents on
the dollar, or forty dollars greenbacks for the
-SI,OOO note. The excuse for this is, that the law
required him to return it at its value in Confed
erate notes, and that he should be held to the
valuation he then placed upon in returnin'- it
for taxation. This is a cunning scheme to\s.
cape pecuniary responsibility.’'
Commenting on ttic foregoing our Macon oo
temporary adds: “ Let legislators see that such
schemes as this, and unjustifiable extravagance
do not escape notice from a vigilant press!"’
VETO OF TEE STAY LAW,
Executive Department, i
Milledgeville, March 6, 1860. $
To the Senate:
Having given serious consideration to “a bill
to be entitled an act for the relief of the people
of Georgia, and to prevent the levy and sale of
property under certain circumstances, and
within a limited period,” which originated in
your body, with more than ordinary anxiety, if
possible to concur with the General Assembly
in the propriety of its enactment, 1 am con
strained to return it without approval.
The Constitution of the United Slates express
ly ordains that “no State shall pass any law im
pairing the obligation of contracts."
The application of this provision to the act
under consideration involves two enquiries:
First. What is meant by the obligation of a
contract? Secondly, What constitutes an im
pairment of it ?
A proper consideration of the subject requires
a distinction between a contract and its obliga
tion. The former is “an agreement to do or
not to do a particular thing.” The latter is that
which bind* the promisor to perform his agree
ment. We often speak of a moral obligation to
perform a promise, the sanction of which is
found in a pure and enlightened conscience.—
But it is evidently not this which the Constitu
tion was designed to save from impairment, be
cause it is simply impossible for legislative ac
tion to change the dictate of conscience regard
ing any antecedent duty which one person may
owe to another.
We speak, also, of the legal obligation of a |
contract, by which is meant the force of law,
compelling its performance or giving an equiv
alent after its breach. In arguing the case of
Ogden vs. Sanders, Mr. Webster remarked, “ the
municipal law is the force of society, employed to
compel the performance of contracts." This
force consists of all the means provided by law.
to enable the promisee, without disturbing the
peace of society, to compel the performance, by
a reluctant promisor, of his engagement. Thus
understood it is clear that the Legislature, if
unrestrained, would be capable of impairing or
destroying tiie obligation; and it is precisely to
guard it, that this prohibition was inserted in
the Constitution.
The question then is presented, whether or
not this act against the intendment of the Con
stitution, Impairs the obligation of contracts.—
It provides “that there shall be no levy or sale
of property of defendants in this State under
tfny execution founded on any judgment,-order
or decree, of any court heretofore, or hereafter
to be rendered, upon any contract or liability
made or incurred prior to the Ist of June, 1865,
provided the said defendant shall pay or cause
to be paid during each year one-fourth of the
amount of principal and interest of such execu
tion, or of the debt or claim, on which such
execution lias been or may be hereafter be ob
tained, so that the entire indebtedness, Shall be
paid in four vdfirs from the first day of January
—t lits firsf instalment to be paid by the first of
January, 1867, and the fourth and last by the
first of January, 1870.” Any olHeer levying or
selling is made liable for a trespass. Here we
remark that the prohibition of the Constitution
is not directed solely against the destruction of
the obligation. It is not that no State shall pass
any law destroying the obligation. Were it so
expressed, however impolitic or unjust it might
be, in any supposable case to impair without
destroying it, the Constitution could not be in
terposed as as barrier to such action. But it is
explicitly against impairment that the prohibi
tion Jis directed. The intention being negative,
not positive—prohibitory, not mandatory, the
lesser interference is expressed, because being
included in the greater, its pievention prevents
both. Hence it appears that something more
was intended than to keep the obligation alive!
which is all that can be claimed for a stay law.
Let it be borne in mind, that the obligation
of a contract is the force of law, compelling its
performance, or giving satisfaction for its breach.
This force has a two-fold operation. First, it
acts judicially, whereby the existence of the
contracts, its breacli and the inode of enforce
ment are determined, all of which are express
ed in the judgment. Secondly, it acts minis
terially, wherein, under command in writing,
an officer of law, either , transfers certain spe
cific property from the possession of the prom
isor to that of the promisee, or converts into
money, in a mode prescribed, such portion of
the promisor’s property as will satisfy the judg
ment, and delivers it to the possesseo. This
done, the obligation of the contract is consum
mated—its performance is enforced.
But if, when the judgmont shall have been
rendered, and the next step according to the
law which creates the obligation, is to issue this
written authority (called an execution,) with
out which the judgment would be valueless, the
State shall pass alnw forbidding theissuance for
one year; or, if, after it shall have been passed,
the proper Officer is forbidden to execute it,
within a year, what effect has this legislation
upon the obligation'? We are told the effect is
to suspend it, leaving it vitally untouched.—
True, by the terms of the law, vitality remains,
but tloes this satisfy the Constitution ? Is there
no diminution, no weakening, no impairment
of ttic force of the law compelling perform
ance ?
Lexicographers tell us that to impair, is to
“ diminish—io injure—to lessen in value." —
Suppose A bout a a judgment against B—and
C to obtain another against D, at tin; same time
each founded on contract, and both according
to the general law, whence the obligation of
contracts springs, capable of immediate execu
tion. Then suppose the Legislature to inter
vene, and enact that tint former shall not be ex
eeuted within one year, leaving the latter un
touched, would tin re then be no difficulty in
the relative strength of the two obligations?—
A man in paralysis has vitality as positive as
has he in good health; yet it is’ impaired. So
•Vs judgment has an obligation, but it is para-i
lyzed, “weakened," “diminished," by the tem
porary loss of its active quality, and, there
fore impaired. i
In executory contracts, time is alwavs an im
portant element. It will probably be conceded
that it would be unconstitutional “for the Gene
ral Assembly to enac t that no promissory notes
heretofore made, and to mature on the first day
of January, 18ti7, shall be considered due, and
payable before the first day of January, IS(W.
If this.be so it fs difficult to perceive how the
constitutionality of the act can be maintained.
If the day of payment may not be postponed
bt/on maturity by legislative action, it would
seem “afortiori" that it may not he, after ma
turity ; or, rather, that the contract may no r *be
thrown back into iminaturitv, and anew da}' of
payment appointed by such action. Pursuing
the line of argument, the right of the promisee
does not lose its character of contract by the
institution of a suit, nor by the rendition of a
judgment to enforee it. That character abides,
anil to it the constitutional guaranty adheres
until it is either extinguished by performance
or smothered by a statute of repose. Indeed,
this act specially refers to contracts in judg
ment and to their dates. Hence I conclude the
Legislature lias no morepower to appoint anew
aud distant day of payment after suit com
menced or judgment rendered, than before. In
all other respects the promtsse’s condition is
considered better after judgment; why
worse in this? Before judgment Is impotent to
compel immediate performance of the contract
The judgment makes rhnt will the motive now!
er ot the obligation, for by it the execution
the final process—may be put iii action. But
by legislation of this character, that motive
power is suspended—temporarily abstracted
trom the obligation. Perpetual injunction
would destroy the obligation, quo ad. the ac
tion of this State; and I cannot resist the con
clusion that temporary injunction would im
• n 7 the j tl(i "ment and execution which are
intended to be the consummation, or eud of the
obligation, are lawful subjects of traffic are
saleable commodities. It is indisputable’ that
the possession, and exercise by the Legislature '
of the power of suspending their operation
would “ lessen their value," as such: and this
brings such legislation within another definition
of impairment, viz it “ lessens the value."
If one Legislature may postpone for a year,
each subsequent one may do the same.
Already have the judgments affected by this
Sot, been suspended five years by such .action.
Upqn principle, these successive postponements
might as well be continued an hundred years or
through all time.
The hundredth wonid be as valid as any pre
ceding one. But how! meantime, fares the ob
ligation ? The consolation offered to the pro
misee, and repeated to successive generations
of his posterity, would be, that it flourished in
a green old age, its strength unimpaired by
time.
The strength of the argument ifi favor of stay
laws lies in the proposition, that final process
is but a part of the remedy which must always
be within the power of the Legislature; other
wise it would be impossible to correct errors in
jurisprudence or to improve the system as ex
perience map develope its Refects. The power
of the Legislature to modify remedies, even at
the cost of delay to suitors, then in court, must
be conceded; but with two qualifications.
First, the intention must be bona fide to
change permanently, and to improve the sys
tem. Secondly, this must always be done, if
posible, so as not to affect injuriously antece
dent rights.
This act cannot be brought within either of
them. First, it contemplates neither any im
! provement nor any permanent change of the
I judicial system. Sections 3558 to 3557, and Sec-
I tion 336 of the Revised Code regulate proceed
! ing after judgment in suits to enforce contracts.
It is obviously not the intention of the General
Assembly to make any change in these further
titan to suspend them for a time, in the class of
cases described in the act. No other course of
proceeding is substituted—judgments rendered
for special purposes are excepted—and none
that may hereafter be rendered on contracts
made since the first day of June, 1865, are in
cluded in the stay. In such cases, therefore,
the courses of the law will be the same as here
tofore. Secondly, if the change were perma
nent—if it contemplated just such a stay of
execution, under judgments to be obtained,
founded on contracts made since the first day of
June last, the office of sheriff is nevertheless
continued, aud therefore all judgments founded
on contracts heretofore made, might be executed
as well as in times past, and the obligation of
the contract be unaffected ; but in point of fact
the bill not only affects them, but injuriously
discriminates against them.
Here, then, is plenary evidence that it is not
one of those great reformatory measure, design
ed to improve the judicial system, for the per
manent advantage of the body politic—that- in
| truth it makes no change in the system, but
only withdraws lor a time from a certain class
of contracts Its obligatory operation. It is a
temporary expedient, interposed between the
debtor and creditor for tlie relief of the former.
It postpones for one year absolutely and for
four conditionally the full performance of dll
the contracts entered into before the first of
June last, and in my opinion as flagrantly vio
lates the Constitution as it affected contracts
running to maturity, by postponing the day of
payment one, or four years, beyond that fixed
by the terms of each.
The course of reasoning adopted, the princi
ples affirmed, and the rules of construction ap
plied to this clause of the Constitution by the
Supreme Court of the United States in several
eases, seem to me to lead to this conclusion,
although in none of them were the Legislative
acts reviewed identical in their provisions with
this. These I shall simply state without quot
ing from them. They are Sturgcs vs. Brown
ingshicld, 4th Wheaton, 122 ; Green vs. Biddle,
Bth Wheaton, 1 ; Ogden vs. Sanders, 12tli,
Wheaton, 213 ; Bronson rs. Kinzoc 1, Howard,
311 ; McCracken vs. Hayward 2 ; Howard, 608.
In these eases, stay laws are, by way of illus
tration, more than once referred to as violating
this clause of the Constitution. In the first,
Chief Justice Marshall, who bore a part in the
proceedings for the adoption of the Constitu
tion, expresses the opinion that the passing of
suelt laws by the States was one of the chief
causes which induced the insertion of this
clause. Judge Parsons, at page 703, of the 2d
volume of his authoritative treatise on contracts,
affirm the proposition as established by author
ity, that “an exemption of property from at
tachment (by which is,meant levy) or a subjec
tion of it to a stay law or appraisement law,
impairs the obligation of the contract." He adds:
“Such a statute can be enforced only ds to con
tracts made subsequently to the law.”
There are, I concede, cases supporting the
opposite conclusion, but I think they are sus
tained neither hv the weight of authority nor
by the force of logic,
Our own constitution contains a clause simi
lar to that quoted from the Constitution of the
United States. But it is not alone, this du
plicate prohibition which, in my opinion, pre
cludes legislation of this character. The first
clause pf the first section of tlie second article
of the constitution of Georgia, is in these
words: “ The Legislative, Executive and Judi
cial departments shall lie confided to a separate
body of magistracy. No person, or collection of
persons , being of one department, shall exercise
any power properly attached to either of the oth
ers, except in cases herein expressly excepted." —
It is to the latter sentence I pertinently refer.
The invest igation and determination of private
rights; the enforcement of contracts between
individuals when one of the parties refuses com
pliance, and clearly powers properly belonging
to the judicial department. Their exercise is
invoked by suit in court, which, being institu
ted, is properly under the control of t hat de
partment, from the filing of the petition to the
return of final process, executed ; when, so r the
purpose of preventing wrong or oppression, or
of doing full and complete justice in any cast, it
becomes necessary to arrest the proceedin'.:';
» whether before or after judgment, this can oni y
be done by the writ of injunction, and that is
sues proper!)/ out of Chancery, which appertains
1 exclusively to the judicial department. What
| are the rights upon which the bill under cohsid
i cration acts ? They are those which have been
asserted by suits in courts of justice ; have been
those investigated and adjudicated, and which
those courts are proceeding to enforee by their
final processes, called executions. Whataction
does this bill propose upon them ? It does not,
indeed, set them aside—annul them—but it sus!
pends action under them for a, specified time.—
What is this suspension but an injunction of a
judicial proceeding? The form of the wiit used
iu the department to which the power properly
belongs, is not observed, but the precise end is
attained—the injunction is as effectually im
posed as if a writ in due form had ema'nated
from the legislative source.
Let us look a little more in detail into this
matter. A writ called an execution issues from
the Inferior Court of Baldwin countv directed
to the sheriff,commanding him to make by levy
and sale of the property of C Done hundred
dollars, which A B lately in that court recover
ed of him, and further that he return that writ
into court at the next-term, which means in
law, that he return it executed. If the sheriff
do not make the money as required, he may at
the return term of the writ be ruled and com
pelled to pay it himself, unless he can show
good cause for his failure. This is the course
of the law, and this its end. But suppose when
so called on he should exhibit a writ, sued out
of the Chancery side of the Superior Court of
Baldwin county, at the suit of C I>, command
ing him to desist trom levy and sale, under tiiat
particular execution, until the further order of
the court; he stands justified because he is en
joined. One branch of the judicial department
armed by law with the power, lias arrested
t’uGon er ’ Rm ”° Vlolcu< ! e is d °ne to the consti
tution. But suppose, instead of exhibiting a
wm of injunction from the Superior Cornhe
c . x . hllnt a " a ct of the Legislature for
btddmghim to execute within a vear, anv fi fa
issued by any court. If he be excused™ whm
ground . Clearly that lie was enjoined. That
!hoi' K Kla lr l Junction ' in the one ease was in
the exercise ot “a power properly attached” to
tlie judicial department cannot possibly h T~
nied. Then liow can it be maintained that* «
imposition of the legislative injunction L ,
other case, would be conformable to the
visions of the Constitution I have quoted
not manifest that such legislation prod,® ”
direct collision between the departments * ti?
mandate issued by the judicial department if
m strict conformity with the laws of the StT,
Without repealing those laws, without uerVni
nently curtailing the powers of the courts t )
legislative.department simply intervenes and for
bids tlie ministerial officer obeying the iudie' i
mandate. It was for the express purpose of
preventing such conflict this provision
inserted in the Constitution. ““
There is another objection to the bill W b; cl| ,
cannot pass over in silence. It classifies con
tracts and discriminates between the classes
injuriously to one of them, or rather to the
parties interested in their enforcement. Con
tracts made prior so the first day of June, lKif,
constitute one class, those made subsequently’
another. To the former only is the stay of
execution, under it, applied, "if separate jud*-
ments should be obtained in the month of
January 1867, the one founded on a contract
entered into before the first day of June 1865
and the other on a contract made after the last
mentioned day, even though they were based
upon considerations equally meritorious, the
stay of this law would attach to the former’ aud
not to the latter. lam utterly at a loss to ’con
jecture upon what principle, consistent with
equal justice, this discrimination is founded
Indeed it would seem that if any discrimination
were made, it should be in favor of that class of
creditors, a very large majority of whom have
already been subjected to five of these legisla
tive injunctions, successively enacted, and so
linked, as to compose a chain, extending over
as many years. Tlie elder creditor is tied up
and the junior left untramelcd; nay more, the
Judgment creditor of five or more years stand
ing is arrested, whilst to the simple contract
creditor of yesterday, the highway to full'and
complete compulsory performance is left open.
It may be said that whenever a junior execution!
pot stayed by tlie proposed law, shall by levy
and sale cause money to be made, the older
executions arc not restrained from being inter
posed to claim it. But this can scarcely be in
tended, for in that event, the law Inust fail to
give the promised relief. Under any Circum
stances, this could only occur where there were
judgments of both classes against the same
debtor, and the suggestion therefore does not
relieve the measure from the Alleged discrimi
nation. Even in those cases the debtor would
be under a strong temptation to apply his means
to the satisfaction of the junior judgment, re
serving for the senior only the annual instal
ment necessary to keep hint in fetters, and thus
the discrimination would still operate injuri
ously.
I take no pleasure in the performance of this
duty.' Always reluctant to disagree with the
General Assembly, I can truly say this disagree
ment is painful in the extreme. I have abun
dant sympathy for the suffering people of Geor
gia, and in the desire of the General Assembly to
alleviate their sufferings. But on entering this
office I took at the threshold, in presence of
you all, a solemn oatii to preserve, protect and
defend the Constitution of the United.
and of the State of Georgia; and this I must do,
as I, not as others understand those instruments.
If I doubted I would give the measure the
benefit of the doubt and leave its constitu
tionality to the courts; but, not doubting, I
must dissent as I regard my oath. Upon such
subjects, men equally earnest in search of truth,
and equally upright,'and fair, in their habits of
thought, are prone to differ. Whenever such
a difference occurs, it becomes each party to ex
tend to the other tlie meed of upright intention.
I have done what I conceive to he my duty, and
if after reconsideration, which I respectfully
invite, a constitutional majority of the General
Assembly should adhere to tlie measure, I shall
indulge the hope that no detriment will come to
the State, either from its seemingly unequal
practical operation or from its imputed viola
tion of tlie fundamental law.
(Signed) Charles J. Jenkins,
Governor.
Latest News from Europe.
From the New York Sun, of the Btli iust., we
obtain the following:
The Inman steamer City of New York, from
Queenstown on the 22d‘ Os February, has ar
rived at this port.
The Daily News makes the announcement
that Generals Grant and Sherman will visit En
gland In May next.
It is announced that Queen Victoria will
hold during the season, at Buckingham Palace,
five courts, for the reception of a certain num
ber of ladies and gentlemen—each reception
being limited to 25(1. The Prince and Princess
of Wales'will hold Dra wing Rooms and Recep
tions on behalf of Her Majesty.
Messages were presented in both Houses of
Parliament, from the Queen, on the 20th, ask
ing that provision be made for the Princess Hel
ena, on her marriage, and for Prince Alfred on
his coming of age.
Mr. Gladstone gave notice of a motion for the
erection of ,a monument to Lord Palnieston, in
Westminster Abbey.
The Times says the Suez Canal question is
definitely settled. The company do not retain
a single acre ofground except such as is needed
for the maritime channel. Politically this ar
rangement removes all possible questions of
dispute.
In the House of Commons, on the 2Cth, Mr.
Clay introduced a reform bill, which proposes
that the electorial franchise shall be given to
every male over 21 years of age, who has re
ceived a fair education. Mr. Gladstone, (n some
remarks upon the measure, declined to give anv
explanation as to what the Government intend
ed to propose.
London, Feb. 22.— The Bank of England has
reduced its rates of interest to 7 per cent.
The Paris Patrie says certain proposals have
1 ’manatee! from Maxmilian which render possi
s.'Me the return of 5,000 troops from .Mexico
b} • the end of May.
PRUSSIA.
It is stated that the advanced Liberals had re
solved to call on the Government to withdraw
a letter addressed by the Chamber by Count
lon Rismark, otherwise thev will decline to
discuss any future bills presented by the Gov
ernment.
AUSTRIA.
Disquieting war rumors were afloat at Vien
na, in reference to the relations between Aus
tria and Prussia on the question of the Duchies
COMMERCIAL.
Liverpool, Feb. 23.^Cotton—Sales of Wed
nesday and Thursday 16,000 bales, including
4,000 bales to speculators and exporters. Mar
ket irregular and 1-4 and. lower, under news from
America.
Breadstuffs quiet and steady. Provisions
steady., except bacon, which is firmer, and lard,
which tends upwards.
Feb. 22.—Consols for money, 871-2
aB7 5-8. United States. Five-Twenties 69 3-8*
fill 5-8. Erie shares, 53a58 1-3. Illinois Cen
tral shares, 76 l-2a77.
Washington, March 4.—Secretary Seward,
in an interview with a Pennsylvania' member,
grew very much excited over political matters,
aud denounced Congress in the most violent
manner. He said there was not a rebel in the
country to-day ; that which is termed Johnson's
policy is his; that he laid it. out for Lincoln,
who adopted it, and was carrying it out when
he died; and that Johnson is merely continuing
it. He declared himself in favor of the imme
diate admission of the Southern delegations,
and the repeal of the test oath.
There are one hundred and ninety-one in*
ternal revenue collection districts in the United
States.