Judge Bond's Usurpation

Ou Saturday last the Supremo Cour of South Carolina imposed a fine o f 1,500 upon eaeh of the uiumbers of th State Board of Cuuvassors for rfusal to obey its mandatos, and also couiuiitter the several members to jail to fiwait th further action of the court. Ou Mon day, Uuited States Judge Bond issuw a writ of habeiis corpus, had the prison ers brought before him, contiiiued th heariug until Wedno6day, and commit ted theui to the charge of the Unitei States Marshal. The applicution fo the writ was " based on the ground tha the board were discharging the dutie of appointing Presidontial elector when the Supremo Court of tho Stat interfered." Which statement is uu trui;, but if true would not warrant the interferonce of Judgo Boud. The Board of Canvassers are in no wise United States officers or quasi United States officers, and there is no law giving a United States Couit or other United States authority jurisdiction over tbein or their acts. And they were not engaged in " appointing l'residential electors " and could not have been so engaged at the time the " Supreuie Court interfered," or at any other time. Thoso electors were appoiuted on tho 7th day of November, by the votes of the duly qualifidd electora of the State of South Carolina. The duties of the Bi ard were only to canvass the votes by which the' appointment had been mivdc and certify the rosult. Besides, the pretenso that Presideutial ülectors are in any sense Uuited States officers is too preposterous to be considered serious. They are appointed or elected under tho authority of State law, they represent the State in their ction and votes, they are paid by the State, and it is entirely optional with the State to appoint tin m or cot. But if this view is not conceded, the issue of the writ is in direct violation of the spirit and letter of the statute law of the United States, which not only does not bonfer jurisdicción in such cabes but prohibits it. Wo quote : "The vrrit of habeas corpus shall in no case fxicn.l to a piisoner injail( unless where he i& in cuïtody umtor or by colur ot the authority ui the Uuiteü States, or is committed lormal hetore some court tliereof ; or is in custdy tor uu uct done or oniitted, in pursuance of a luw ot tho Unitü State?, or ot' any oriler, pro cess, or decree of a court, or judge tliereof ; or is .in custody iu violation ot the Conatitution or of al; w or treaty of the United Stiltes ; or, benig a suttject or Citizen ot a torsión Slate, and domiciled ihereiu, is in custoily tor au act ú' ne or otnitted under hu alleed ritfht, title, authority, privilege, protection, or exemption claiiued under the conimisáion, or oider, or sanctiou of any foreign State, or under color ttiert'of , the vaiidity and effect whereoi deptnd uto the Uw of uatioua; or imless lt is ueoeasary to brin the pnsouer mto court to testify." [llevised Statutes of Uuited States, section 75J.1 We might also add that the action of Judgo Bond is also iu direct violation of precedent and a repudiation of the oft-repeated decisions of the Supreuie Court of the United States. But if law will uot restrain it is folly to cite precedent. If Judgé Boud shttll prsist iu the course he has chosen the House should, iuitnediately on convening next week, prefer articles of iiupeachmeut against him and bis supciiors at Washington under whose orders ho doubtess aeted. Partisan as the pénate is, the case is so clear that it cauuol f.til to convict. - Since writing the above we have the N. Y. Eceiung Post, of the 27 th uit., which, discussing the jurisdietion of Judge Boiid says: "The canvassera are not 'ederal officers. Their business was not ederal business. The collieion between hem and the Suprcine Cuurt of the State occurred upon State business - the canvassing of votes lor State officers and meuibers of the State Legislature. The Eipublican jonrnals which counsel ederal ïuteiference to release the canvassers seein to us to be attacking their own positiou. That poeilioD is that the nppointment of electora ie purely State matter, and that there is no federal autbority to inquire into it any fartber thau to ascertaiu what the State has done in the matter." Aud the Post is XOT a Democratie jonrnal. The Chriaüan Union says of the pend ing contest over the Presidenlial electors before the Canvassing or Returnin"; Boards of Florida and Louisiana : ''We believe that the final resul t of the present unpleasant and apparantly un profitable tnrmoil will be advantageous to tlie countiy. It will acqtiaiut the wliols people with ths deticts in our present sjsteto which statesraen and juriste have loog recognized, will lead to thé abolition of the electoral cillegcs which wcr d'Vised to give the slave holding States a prtponderance in the Prcfidential elfCtiuna as in Congress,' e'c. Now, the writur in the Chrinlian ülUOfl ought to know th ,t there is not a Wüld ot trnth in the last clause of the quotation we luake. The eleotoral coleges were not "devised" in the interest f the slave-holding States, - as the writer evidently uses that phrase, for at In L'iuiainim thus far the procfed nps of the Uetiirniux Bohp! nppottt to have been fair a nl un pai tial. - llfywter. Wcru the arbitrary rules adopted "itonrtial '" Was the refusal to take the returns froiti a known Democratie parsh (for want of 75 cents with which to ay the charges on the same) from the ex press office, i m pardal 'i Was the reu.sal to order fivu neglectful liupnblican Supervisors of Demcicratic parishes o make their returns fair and imparial 'r1 Was the fiuding of affidavits nado in New Orleans Nov. 25, inside of a sealed package rnailed Nov. 14 in De Soto, several huudreil miles away, eviluiicu that the Board or its Socretary was either impai tial or honest 'Í If tho aforesaid Board bas indulged in a single fair and mpartial act, the record of ts proceedings singularly fails to discloso it. be timo the Constitution was framod and the electoral colleges " devised " he States were all sluve-holding States. ?he elec'oral college systein was not a concession to slave-holding States, but o the smaller States, - " devised " and dopted for their protection agaiust the argo aud more populous States with which they were forming a Union and iuking their destinies. Tue Chrisliun Jnion has studied history to little pur)ose or it would uot so yroclaim its ignorance.