Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1862-11-29
The Executive Power-Review of Judge
Curtis's Pamphlet.

Judge CURTIS, OF Boston, has recently
| written q pamphlet against the President s
proclamation, which is greedily copied by
all the pro. slavery and semi secesh prints in
the country. The following brief and ami
hilatiDg review OF it is publishedin the Bos-
ton Ad0ertiser, from the pen of Hon. The
oPHILUs Parsons. one of the ablest of liv-
ing jurists, whose works are recognized
authority in all our courts:
There are three questions concerning
the Presidents Emancipation Proclama-
ton. One, has he constitut onal power
to issue it as a civil, political, or admins
tratlon act2 rhe second, was it expe
dent? The third, has be constitutional
power as Commander-inC Chief to issue it,
at this time, as military act?
These questions are perfectly distinct.
One of the most common and most fruit
ful causes of error, upon all subjects, is
the mingling Of questions which are dis
tinct in themselves, but so near each other
that they confuse each other.
Judge Curtis mingles these questions so
entirely, that no study of his pamphlet
enables me to see clearly as to much of
bis argument upon which of these ques-
tons IL is intended to bear.
Let Us separate tnese questions.
am sure that the President has no
power to emancipate single slave, as a
civil, political, or administrative act
Was it expedient? | leave this question
to the President. For he is honest, he is
capable; he has considered the question
long, carefully and painfully, and in all
the relations IN which it can present itself
However wise l may be, or Judge Curtis
may be, on this subject the President must
be wiser, or all rules OF probability fail.
AS to the remaining question, [ have not
the slightest doubt of his constitutional
power, as Colnmander.in-C Chief, to issue
this proclamation as a military act.
If Halleck, when before Corinth, might
have sent force hundred miles to catch
and bring into his lines hundred negroes
with the wagons, horses, and provisions
they were bringing to Beauregart, the
President and Commander in-Chief, sit
ting IN the center, with wider views wider
necessities, and wider rights to meet those
necessities, may, if he can, prevent the
whole mass of slaves from laboring TO feed
the rebellion. He may. if he can, by the
danger of insurrection, or of starvation, or
of loss of property, dishearten the rebels
and drive their armies home.
TO say otherwise would be to say that
he might strike at rebellion, but must be
careful not to strike away its corner stone.
Can he do it in fact? This question
touches the expediency of the measure,
and this leave to him. But it does not
touch his military right to threaten it, and
do it if he can.
Judge Curtis speaks much and eloquent,
ly OF the Presidents right to iDhlct t." pen
atty " and punishment" and the rights
of the Rebels to the protection of the law.
Rebellion bas no right. Ii rebellion
means anything it means the Remuneration
and destruction of all law. And therefore
it is accused before God and man.
No rebel has any right, regard to
which should weaken or obstruct any mil.
itary measure needed to subdue the re-.
bellion
Judge Curtis's argument would give the
constitution and the law to the rebels, as
their sword to smite with and their shield
to save them, and leave it to US only as a
father.
Then he tells US the innocent must suffer
with the guilty. This is true and it is sad.
But when the mingled fire and bail of
Gods vengeance run along the ground,
they pursue no devious path that they
may leave the homes of the innocent IN
harmed for when national sins bring ma
tional calamities, the innocent suffer with
the guilty. This may be one of the mystic
ries OF Providence; it is at all events a
fact. And " hat has been will be.
THEoPHILUS Parsons.
tJanhridpe Macs