American citizen. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1851-1863, 1863-05-01


WI-.r .ff.H ~
Itt
.f..|H Ff Hf If Ef..
f- lE III' "
U. H... ffaH ~
|fa UffH FHHt.t HI
H.HH#
rFf8t 10 ta.mttt
HaAHte cad lr ft0srH H'Ifr'n
TI. tIHfUs uf i.f.HWtNf.f N' H0f aHce
to- uti.nn.Ht f' NUll0s.1H Ihry
taI ffuttI, owed fIftHt. 'H Do Govern
.fflctutfI s'W.i FIt .hst BED been
cancelled .aI ttmfrai hg 'hn feW.n'on
.ffif sIHar 4Hl tia Hni9a vfb ODE E1nleief
zee s.afps n 6We1ft 1Hi
afvornoy v taf tutfb uAtrs
ts4lh4 the 6aH Iruruts " fhs United
States AMI revolution Of TFIr government
III Fundamental rtufc fte htI bnan die
rsriei ne independent Judiciary ole o.
the eu nfdDnafe departments " ibe 'l'"fh.
ment haj been Substantially abolished RI ne
suptemc legislative power uureslnr.rl ~
even me Federal Constitution, hal bfrn
usurped hy the one executive Chief hagi4
trsts and hr rights and power Of The states
having been sef no nauEht aH ul4nulnpd
military desputt>m wac rhrfc Upon estah.
H.LeI and exercised Immediately over the
d,ien.rless people This was not mere
tnladmipi.tati1u--ft was rey, luton, and
tlr .urpo.iiion that the people " Louisiana
.e,d 10 thi. dpspolism all the allegiance
tlpv Ind formerly owed to The Republic Of
me United states and that, being bound
~ prknovlcge n, 1T was their duty to con.
firm It with an oath, Is simply false ~ Tact
and law.
There had been no counter revolution Of
the state or IT,, Government No new state
Government in the form required by the Fed
cral Constitution had been organized or at
tempted within It's territory all remained
within and parcel Of the Confederate States
of America and in this position wa' engaged
in the public war with the Federal Govern
inuHt--and
II is immalerial whether this revolution
had been entirely accomplished, or the Gov
eminent was il, the lrau-Itory state; and that
this monst,r was only tier pr0islOHaI Gov
eminent. Louisiana had reyolted from the
de.polsln, and orcrdri from the United
Statc., whatever was their condition, aud
was no louper within the dominion Of the
Government at Washington
POSITION oF rus rroPIr or SEW ORLEANS.
The supposItion that whenever in pub
lie aud 4urmu war, one Of the brlligcrents
has captured a city Of the enemy and, occu-
pying district Of its territory, has estab
ltshrd over It a military government. 1t may
immediately thereupOn require the propIe
under their military power 60 rrnouncc their
allegiance to their own government, and take
an oath Of allegiance 10 he Government #
The public enemy, ~ equally repugnant to
common sense aud the Established rules OF
public law. All hat can be required of the
prope IN such predlcament IA to submit to
the military government temporarily estab
hshpd over them. A few people in New
Orleans therefore had 10 power to rvnonnre
their allegiance 10 tltAer Louisiana or the
Conf d,racy,
There wa, nothing in the rotation which
these people occupied to the Government at
Washington which could constitute Il primer
pal obligation aud therefore tins oath of
allegiance, considered "a u secondary obi.
lrror aud existing duly. was destitute of all
foundation. aud .equently nail and void
The position that the supposed obligation
Of this oath Of allegiance was principal
obligation created by the oath itself, aud IN
tins view binding an Tho conscience, ls deS.
tl'ule of all color II ,heso jurors had stood
indifferent Ia The Government of Lomsiana
aud the Confrderacy, they would have had
the rlyht 10 adopt themselves suhipcts OF the
drspulsn at Washington or ANY whore else,
sud thHeupon they might have lawfully
taken the oath Of allegiance to that Govern
meul, and they would have been bound 10y it
NnliI they accomplished revolution but all
these Jurors, cllizens OF Louisiana, were
bound 10y heir allegiance to the State aud the
Confederate States, and their subscription Of
the oath of allegiance TO the Government at
Washington was breach OF this their allpgi-
auce aud was unlawful And in every case
where tn. oath WINS not estorted Toy threats,
and the manifest danger OF an evil sufficient
to render II null on This ground, was highly
criminal.
These positions were distinctly laid down
by Yourself and all is cnnclusiveiy proved
by your Argument aud 1t seems to me that
The proposition that the oath was void of all
moral AS we'll as legal obligation is here nee.
rssarily implied.
LOYAL JURORS,
1t will be recolltcted you had not yet dis.
charged any of the jurors OF all censure from
whom the oath had been eStorted by even tie
most terrible threats, but had thus far seemed
TO hold that their act was not only unlawful,
but was even III some degree criminal --
Pressed however by your sense Of the difficult.
ty OF their situation, you determined if posi-.
bic, tn devise mode for their relief This
was Impossible without the admission hat
their oath was destitute of all internal AS
well a. external obligation aud it seems to
me that this is the necessary inference from
:. =. l.