, 1861-09-17
Gbitaao Griihutte


We have endeavDreu OF late to impress
upon our readers our own, and Of course,
in our opinion, the proper method by which
the rebels msy BE- put down and the
peace Of the country restored. We have
assumed aud still believe that all 1oyal
men, all men in districts where the loyalty
Of the masses is SO confirmed that the civil
tribunals can enforce their judgements,
are protected By the Constitution and the
laws. They are shieled between US and
the arbitrary exercise Of power; and he is
traitor who would remove it All men IN
arms against the Government are without
the pale Of the Constitution. They cannot
take advantage Of its guarantys; they
are entitled 10 none Of the rights secured
to true men in its sacred pages; they eau
not appeal to it for protection. They have
condemned it, rebel1ed against and are now
endeayoring By force OF arms to oyerturn
it. Can it be possible that it can be made
an agent in its own destructiona This is
simple theory, but it is comprehensive
and efficient It follows, then, If it is cor-
rect, that the persons aud possessions of
rebels are at the mercy of the military
power. They must be, for war is the
sbrogation Of all law, and an appeal
TO brute force rs between the parties
engaged. When firing begins, pleading
ends. The General, when in an enemy's
country, sits in the Judges seat and en-
forces lis decisions with his sword This
is no less the case in q rebellion than if our
armies were il Mexico or Canada We're
it not, fighting would be impossible Were
the Constitution in force in the rebel States,
the General commanding would be guilty
of murder if he should order his troops to
fire upcn the enemy without first having
them tried under the Constitution, for
treason and securing 1or himself the place
60 .xecutiouer. If the Constitution is in
fu1ce, he ought to be attended by peripa-
,e,ic court, and, preliminary to each en-
sagtmcnt, ought to send out his constables
and halitIs with posse and bring the
repels in and examine into their loyalty.
If they are guilty. he may fight and kill
them. This CONCLUSION is Irresistible,
and these who c1amor for an OBJ
seryance OF legal forms in the
war, must accept and ACT upon it. And SO
Of rebel property We hold that it is ab-
solutely at the disposal Of the military arm
OF the Government, to be removed OF de-
streyed as necessity may demand. Life is
Ct n1cre consequence than money. If We
may shoot traitors, may ne not seize their
cattle snd their slayes7 The matter re-
solves into formula Ike this: In en en-
emy's territory there can be no law,
otber than martial law; and military ne
cessi1y is sufficient justification for what
Ever, within the unwritten code that regu-
lates civilized warfare, is done Fremont's
proclamation most timely, necessary
aud wholesome enunciation Of what ought
to be the rule Of action wherever rebels are
found in arms, embodied the popular and
proper doctrines In spite Of the Presi-
dents Order Is Commander-in- Chief,
"1fAEos lAC Elt34AlAAAAAV II l<AANA O0A VI
F1emoni's words, this war will not go on
another quarter before We shall be COM
PEELED to return to this law Of retaliation
which the head Of this Department an
nounced. Let it not be objected that this
is despctism. War is always despotism
to those sgairss whom it is made. A con.
stitutional, legal, humane war is impossi
b!e. War, as We have before said, is the
destruction or abregation Of all law. Wa1
and law which shall protect those whon
We war against are as Incompatible as frt
and water. They cannot cocxist. Until
then, we get rid Of the notion that rebels
defying both the constitution and the laws
have constitutional and legal rights, W
shall he assisting them in training thei
guns upon ourselves.