Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-09-07


OF numerical or military power"
This, Mr.. Magofin must have known to be
incorrect Nine out of the ten Congress
men, elected with special reference to the
question, voted for the Crittenden resolu-
tiOns, which declare that the war was COM
menced by the Southern diaunionists, and
that it ought to be carried on by the Gov.
ernment till the Union is restored; and to
give effect to their declaration, they voted
to appropriate $5OO,OOOOOO to equip an army
Of five hundred thousand men, to be en-
ployed in crushing the rebellion.
But so fearful is the Governor Of an i'm
peacement, that he is unwilling to rest upon
his defense, but makes the following pledge:
"Their final decision will be law TO me.
Every constitutional act of their lawful rep
resentatives will be executed by me with as
much vigilance and fidelity as if it origin
ated in my own brain. No true States
rights man can ever set himself in factious
opposition to the will of the people of his
State, however honestly he may be opposed
to her policy"
Whether he will redeem his pledges OF
not we have no means of judging, except by
his past acts; and they offer no guarantees.
He knows that the people elected nine out
of ten members of Congress, pledged to the
maintenance of the Union and that they gave
expression to the will of their constituents
by voting an army of five hundred thousand
men why, then, did he not bow to the
majesty of the people, by calling out the
quota OF his State? This army was author
ized by Congress- directly; and he had not
the excuse of ilegality, by which he avoided
the Presidents first proclamation.
In reference to this first call, the Governor
says:
"The Presidents war proclamation, of
April 10, in which he called for seventy. FIVE
thousand militia, was, in my opinion, illegal,
even in view of the professed objects of the
call; and / did not then doubt that the real
object of it was the prosecution of an uncou-
stitutional war of coercion against the South,
l did not and could not hesitate, therefore,
in returning peremptory refusal to the de-
mand upon me for Kentucky troops.
'The act of 1875 was passed by Congress
to provide for calling forth the militia to ex-
ecute the laws of the Union, to suppress in
Burrections and to repel invasions. Upon a
careful consideration of the act, it is manifest
that the calling forth of the militia contem-
plated was where there had been a judicial
investigation, decision of the court and ex-
ecution awarded, and the power of the courts
and the marshal's power not being sufficient,
! the President being officially informed,
should call out the militia"
Here is an amount of ignorance or peryer-
sion of the truth-and for the sake of the
honor of fKentucky we will call it the former
: which few other men could have condensed
/ in the same space. The act of 1895 was made
to meet such cases as the "Whisky Insurrec-
ton" in Pennsylvania; and it is well known
that then only judicial proceedings in that
instance were had after the rebellion had
been crushed; and the law was made ex-
pressly to suppress insurrection first and pun
ish traitors afterward.
Does Mr.. Magoffin see the consequences o.
his theory2 If there be no judicial proceed
ings, there can be no calling of the militia
and hence any law may be nullified by 6
mob, which may prevent the session of 6
Court and the Executive is powerless tc
protect its officers or the innocent who may
suffer by their absence. The law provides
that when there are combinations too power
full to be put down by the civil authority, thu
President may call out the militia; and i
was in such an exigency that the President
first proclamation was issued.
But we forbear to pursue the subjec
further; not that we have noticed all th,
falsehoods and inconsistencies the messag,
contains, but because they are SO glaring ant
obvious that further comment is unneces
sary.