The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1861-10-19
The Charleston sequcs.ra.ion Case.

The Couyicr of Wednesday, gives the pro-
oeedings of Tuesday in the Confederate Court
at Charleston, in the case TO the privilege
of Advocates against the process issued under
the Seqnestration Act:
MIR. Petigru opened his argument by stat
ing that the demurrer would be sustained by
him upon two grounds.
First. That the proceeding is irregular and
unconstitutional He took the ground that
no man has Il right 10 purge the conscience of
another, unless in some suit in which he is
called rs a witness, or in some proceeiin 2
in which as a party he is bound to answer !;
or in answer to the call OF the sovereign
by the oath of allegiance or the oath of
office. The oath of Office, the oath of ale
glance, the obligation of testifyiEg to the
truth in court of justice between parties
ltgant, are acknowledged. We We're never
famous for our opposition to authority. No
person was more ready to render to Caesar ali
tnat C1sar has the least dpeency OF pretence
TO demand. But the obedience to this writ
which requires a general discovery of alien
enemies and all the Information in the power
OF the party summoned for the purpose of
discovering what property o! alien enemies
may be come At, deny to answer and refuse
And the reason of this refusal is simple, al
tnough IT seems to surprise some; bUi, ae St.
Paul says, was born free, anG will not for
felt that freedom which inler!t from my
free mother. L will not submit to re com
manded where there is no right 10 command
Mr. Petigrn, after speaking OF the irregu-
ialiilts ti TIC WIN, anu Tie dangerous uSuT
patrons OF public right, and of the lawful i'm
munities of a free citizen, said there had been
formerly much debate as to the relations of
the State and the Federal Union
Some held that the authority of each came
from the people, that there was Il divided
sovereignty, and each in igS sphere SuUremp
But now there conld be no pretence of this.
The Confederate States We're limited by a
grant ]ealouslv phrased. The oid Constitu-
tion set forth that it was the work OF the peo-
pie. The present recites that the deputies Of
sovereign States had framed it, There was a
grant OF authority 10 execute All powers ne
cessary to Il General Government III the
former chart. In the present 1t read to exc
cute all power expressly granted. Now, could
II be said that the war power included seques-
tratiOn?
This was untrue, Mr.. Petigru argued from
the language OF treaties ana the legislative
construction given by acts of the revolution
airy Congress. This latter was authority I'M
less 1t were claimed that we were wiser than
those historical men. The very nature of
language forbade the idea of sequestrl ton
being term applicable to captures on land
and sea. Debt was an idea. He had heard
the learned counsel lor the Confederate State
say that debts could be captured. That was
only poetical license. Government would
scarcely claim To administer law by Il meta
phor. Was that strict construction to say
That lnasmuch rs one thing could be done,
therefore something like it might also b.,
done?
MIR. Petigru read from the first volume of
South Carolina Statutes Was all this this
quotation,) false? Had DIR. Cooper lived in
vain, spoken IN vain, thought in vain, written
IA vain The Contederacy was but an
agent. The State sovereign. All
through South Carolina, from the Santee
to the Pee Dee, there was but one soye-
reign. Sovercgns could DO wrong. 1t was
OF the essence of soyereingty 10 do wrong,
otherwise law would be above that power
Such things as this writ had been tried before.
The Star Chamber su, pu.na the general war
a ~. t-tl
Mr. Petigru, in the.courss of his argument
Illustrated his positions by reference TO the
course OF En- 2 lish history, the lives of Chief
Justice Pratt John Wilkes and Lord Cam
den. The District Attorney had referred to
the authority of Lord Hale Lord Haies book
was prepared from nn uncorrected posthu-
nous work. Grant, however, the text was
pure. LORD Hale it was who aeld the faruous
assizas and burnt three old women For this
he had more authority than that debts
were coGfscabie. He had scripture for his
belief in wi:hcrlft. 1t was not true tnat
aliens had 10 rights. They had the rights Of
humanity. War no longer was the savage
contest 1t had been. The influence of Chris
tianlty was spreading, and human govern
ments were approaching the principles of
Him ''whose power was in righteousness -
Mir. Peugru illustrated these views III the
presentation OF his points with Il T1atchless
wealth of language and force OF logic. In CON
clusion, he said he had been compelled to
speak in defence of right. He did il when
life had lost much Oflts eHergy-since the fire
of youth is eXhaustcd-and he would that
younger advocates had stood up with youth
tul energy and more prevailing clog guence.
Such rs lie had done, however, he had done.
What we have given above is b'lt a meagra
abstract Of Mr.. Petigrus eloquent argument,
which we hope 10 be able to lay before our
readers in full in q later issue OF the fonrier
Isaac W Hayne, Esq, replied on behalf of
the Government, followed by Mr.. Mitchell in
reply. These arguments we a'so shall take
pleasure ia laying before our readers in an
other iSSup.