Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-07-23
OrrcE OF ArronxEY GESERAI,
Charleston, S. G.. July l6. ls6l

Charleston, S. c.. July Is. 1851
I To S. WVdH, Esq.-SR: You ask my opinion in
reply to the three following queries. viz
Il Is it legal according to the laws OF our Con
federacy for houses IN the Confederaey to be con
| nected with Individuals or houses in the enemy
territory those houses in the enemy territory be-
! ing composed of Southern men event.
%. Is it lawful for houses in the COnfederacy TO
sell any article to houses individuals in the enc
.S. Is it lawful for houses in the Southern Con
federacy to buy any articles Of OF in any wise trade
or traffic with, houses or individuals IN the enemy
country ~
The subject matter of enquiry has relation to a
supposed violation Of the laws Of the Confederate
States and is not within the jurisdiction OF the
State Courts. / shall not therefore, undertake 70
reply officially Attorney General but as laWyer
do not hesitate to answer all three questions ID
the negative. Any trading, any dealing, any m
tercourse. any correspondence whatever. kept up
with any citizen of the enemys country without the
permission of our own Government, is illegal, and
in violation of our duty as citizens OF 0ellgerent
power.
refer you however, for a full exposition Of the
law on this interesting subject to opinion given
by my partner, G. Richardson Miles, Esq, who has
been consulted the acting District Attorney repre-
senting the Confederate States. concur fully IN
the views presented by him in his letter of this
date addressed to Messrs. AveIlhe, Hopkins, and
Edgerton.
Very respectfully. your obedient servant,
l. W. HGYNE Attorney General.
The opinion to which Mr.. HAYNE refers was in an
swer to an inquiry whether the private trans
mission Of mail matter between the citizens of the
Confederate States and the United States is unlaw-
full; and If sO what is the penalty, and what the
mode of procedure in such to bring the offend
era TO punishment! - and is as follows;
OFFICE C. S. DISTRICT ATTORNEY.
CharlestOl. July IL. 1861 (
To Msssrs p A ArsiLte, ,Jr., J. Hard Hopkins and
Snllel f. EigeTt0n;
CESTI gstEN:-I have received your commuuca>
tion asking my opinion, whether the private trans
portation # mail matter between the citizens of the
Confederate States and of the United States is IN
lawful; and if so, what is the penalty Of the Of
fence. and what is the mode to be pursued to bring
the offenders to punishment --
As the questions submitted are novel ones TO
most of cur citizens. and the principles upon
which they are to be decided involve many ether
cases which may arise, it Is necessary for salts
factory reply, that should treat the matter at some
length.
L is very difficult for those who have grown mp
in state of peace, interrupted in this generation
by only two short wars, with foreign nations, to
realize the momentous and extensive consequences
which follow from a scene Of war. And 1t ls espe
ealIy difficult and seemingly almost impossible, for
our peOple, hitherto bound to the citizens OF the
United States by such close social and buslnes ties
which necessarily follows war between the two
countries.
War. however, is not a matter between Govern
ments in their political character merely; 1t affects
every citizen Of both countries. As soon as the
Government which is the acknowledged agent of
the pubhc will, has declared war, it is a war be
tween all the individuals of the and all the ndi
yiduals of which the other nation IS composed
irrespective of the ties Of blood and Of social poll
teal or business athnities.
cnl vvb1 1sh Ta
the necessary incident Of war not only, that the
Government has q right to deal with the persons
and property of the enemy which shall fall into
its mower in such manner as 1t shall deem best for
the interest of the whole, upon an enlarged view OF
poicy and neutrality-suspicious. their persons,
and conscating their property and debts, II It shall
deem 1t expedient to do sO-but also that all rea-
tiops. other than those Of hostility, between the
subjects Of the belgerent countries, must entirely
cease.
been laid down by every writer on the subject but
has been acknowledged and fully acted upon by
every civilized nation Of the world.
Accordingly we lind that the Courts of all coun~
tries have applied the rule to every variety OF case
which has arisen out of the complicated relations Of
commerce with rigid infexibiity, and every en-
deavor to evade its requirements has been exposed
and defeated.
nartnerships with residents of the enemy country
are dissolved by the mere act of war that every
attempt to carry on trade with the enemy by the
Intervention Of third persons is unlawful and no
artice has succeeded in legalizng the trade with
ont the express license Of the Government that all
contracts made with the enemy during the war are
void and the remittance of money to the citizens Of
the enemy, directly or indirectly. IS dangerous
an illegal act But further than this, 1t has been
universally held by the courts of England and the
limited States that it IS unlawful for the citizens Of
| a bellioerent country to withdraw their own mon
ev or property from the enemys country after the
commencement of the war, eXcep- upon the express
| license of the Government And this is on the
| ground that all intercourse and communication
whatever between the citizens Of the respective bel
ligerent nations is unlawful, tending to defeat
/ the object of the war.
II is obvious that it cannot be left TO individuals
To iudre of the propriety of making exceptions 70
the general rule upon the ground either Of person
al convenience necessity, or of public policy To
allow this would at give rise to the most dan
gerous consequences, and in fact, would amount to
complain of the stringency Of the rule because not
onIy is he bound TO sacrifice his individual interest
TO the public good, and his individual Judgment 20
| the public will but, in cases which really constr
tutIan exception, the Government which has de-
cIared var can relax Its operation In the particular
case and can grant special license to hold the
communication which is desired, if compatible with
| the public good. ,-.--,,
| But as this is question upon which the abesi
! iurists of England and America have written, II
| will be much more satisfactory, and viii afford 8
| much more certain guide for the conduct of ou
citizens if quote few passages from their writ
| ings on this subject.
Chancellor Kent, in his Commentaries on the law
| of Nations, says:
"One of the immediate and important couse
ouences of the declaration of war, is the absolute
iDterruDtiOn and interdctiOn of all commercial cor